Metatranscriptomics sheds light on the links between the functional traits of fungal guilds and ecological processes in forest soil ecosystems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil fungi belonging to different functional guilds, such as saprotrophs, pathogens, and mycorrhizal symbionts, play key roles in forest ecosystems. To date, no study has compared the actual gene expression of these guilds in different forest soils. We used metatranscriptomics to study the competition for organic resources by these fungal groups in boreal, temperate, and Mediterranean forest soils. Using a dedicated mRNA annotation pipeline combined with the JGI MycoCosm database, we compared the transcripts of these three fungal guilds, targeting enzymes involved in C- and N mobilization from plant and microbial cell walls. Genes encoding enzymes involved in the degradation of plant cell walls were expressed at a higher level in saprotrophic fungi than in ectomycorrhizal and pathogenic fungi. However, ectomycorrhizal and saprotrophic fungi showed similarly high expression levels of genes encoding enzymes involved in fungal cell wall degradation. Transcripts for N-related transporters were more highly expressed in ectomycorrhizal fungi than in other groups. We showed that ectomycorrhizal and saprotrophic fungi compete for N in soil organic matter, suggesting that their interactions could decelerate C cycling. Metatranscriptomics provides a unique tool to test controversial ecological hypotheses and to better understand the underlying ecological processes involved in soil functioning and carbon stabilization.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".