Small Farm Holder Cropping Systems Influence Microbial Profiles in an Equatorial Rainforest Agroecosystem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The metabarcoding of prokaryotic and fungal (Ascomycota only) ribosomal DNA was used to describe the microbial communities in soils of a remnant equatorial rainforest, maize–bean intercrop, and sugarcane in western Kenya. Cropping systems influenced the microbial community composition and functional traits (energy source and nutrient cycling) of bulk soil in each crop. Microbial richness and diversity tended to increase with cultivation intensity. The soil of the maize–bean intercrop had lower percentages and sugarcane had higher percentages of unique amplicon sequence variants of both bacteria and fungi compared to the remnant forest. Functional traits were altered by cultivation intensity. Compared to remnant forest soils, maize–bean intercrop soil had lower percentages of aerobic chemoheterotrophic bacteria and higher percentages of N-cycling bacteria, while sugarcane had higher percentages of aerobic chemoheterotrophic bacteria and lower percentages of N-cycling bacteria. In the face of increasing forest loss and pressures for agricultural productivity, this landscape provides a rich site for studying the impacts of cropping systems on soil health.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".