Decomposition decreases molecular diversity and ecosystem similarity of soil organic matter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil organic matter (SOM) is comprised of a diverse array of reactive carbon molecules, including hydrophilic and hydrophobic compounds, that impact rates of SOM formation and persistence. Despite clear importance to ecosystem science, little is known about broad-scale controls on SOM diversity and variability in soil. Here, we show that microbial decomposition drives significant variability in the molecular richness and diversity of SOM between soil horizons and across a continental-scale gradient in climate and ecosystem type (arid shrubs, coniferous, deciduous, and mixed forests, grasslands, and tundra sedges). The molecular dissimilarity of SOM was strongly influenced by ecosystem type (hydrophilic compounds: 17%, P < 0.001; hydrophobic compounds: 10% P < 0.001) and soil horizon (hydrophilic compounds: 17%, P < 0.001; hydrophobic compounds: 21%, P < 0.001), as assessed using metabolomic analysis of hydrophilic and hydrophobic metabolites. While the proportion of shared molecular features was significantly higher in the litter layer than subsoil C horizons across ecosystems (12 times and 4 times higher for hydrophilic and hydrophobic compounds, respectively), the proportion of site-specific molecular features nearly doubled from the litter layer to the subsoil horizon, suggesting greater differentiation of compounds after microbial decomposition within each ecosystem. Together, these results suggest that microbial decomposition of plant litter leads to a decrease in SOM α-molecular diversity, yet an increase in β-molecular diversity across ecosystems. The degree of microbial degradation, determined by the position in the soil profile, exerts a greater control on SOM molecular diversity than environmental factors, such as soil texture, moisture, and ecosystem type.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".