Drivers of the microbial metabolic quotient across global grasslands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim The microbial metabolic quotient (MMQ; mg CO2‐C/mg MBC/h), defined as the amount of microbial CO2 respired (MR; mg CO2‐C/kg soil/h) per unit of microbial biomass C (MBC; mg C/kg soil), is a key parameter for understanding the microbial regulation of the carbon (C) cycle, including soil C sequestration. Here, we experimentally tested hypotheses about the individual and interactive effects of multiple nutrient addition (nitrogen + phosphorus + potassium + micronutrients) and herbivore exclusion on MR, MBC and MMQ across 23 sites (five continents). Our sites encompassed a wide range of edaphoclimatic conditions; thus, we assessed which edaphoclimatic variables affected MMQ the most and how they interacted with our treatments. Location Australia, Asia, Europe, North/South America. Time period 2015–2016. Major taxa Soil microbes. Methods Soils were collected from plots with established experimental treatments. MR was assessed in a 5‐week laboratory incubation without glucose addition, MBC via substrate‐induced respiration. MMQ was calculated as MR/MBC and corrected for soil temperatures (MMQsoil). Using linear mixed effects models (LMMs) and structural equation models (SEMs), we analysed how edaphoclimatic characteristics and treatments interactively affected MMQsoil. Results MMQsoil was higher in locations with higher mean annual temperature, lower water holding capacity and lower soil organic C concentration, but did not respond to our treatments across sites as neither MR nor MBC changed. We attributed this relative homeostasis to our treatments to the modulating influence of edaphoclimatic variables. For example, herbivore exclusion, regardless of fertilization, led to greater MMQsoil only at sites with lower soil organic C (< 1.7%). Main conclusions Our results pinpoint the main variables related to MMQsoil across grasslands and emphasize the importance of the local edaphoclimatic conditions in controlling the response of the C cycle to anthropogenic stressors. By testing hypotheses about MMQsoil across global edaphoclimatic gradients, this work also helps to align the conflicting results of prior studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".