Ranking environmental and edaphic attributes driving soil microbial community structure and activity with special attention to spatial and temporal scales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The incredibly complex soil microbial communities at small scales make their analysis and identification of reasons for the observed structures challenging. Microbial community structure is mainly a result of the inoculum (dispersal), the selective advantages of those organisms under the habitat-based environmental attributes, and the ability of those colonizers to sustain themselves over time. Since soil is protective, and its microbial inhabitants have long adapted to varied soil conditions, significant portions of the soil microbial community structure are likely stable. Hence, a substantial portion of the community will not correlate to often measured soil attributes. We suggest that the drivers be ranked on the basis of their importance to the fundamental needs of the microbes: (i) those that supply energy, i.e., organic carbon and electron acceptors; (ii) environmental effectors or stressors, i.e., pH, salt, drought, and toxic chemicals; (iii) macro-organism associations, i.e., plants and their seasonality, animals and their fecal matter, and soil fauna; and (iv) nutrients, in order, N, P, and probably of lesser importance, other micronutrients, and metals. The relevance of drivers also varies with spatial and time scales, for example, aggregate to field to regional, and persistent to dynamic populations to transcripts, and with the extent of phylogenetic difference, hence phenotypic differences in organismal groups. We present a summary matrix to provide guidance on which drivers are important for particular studies, with special emphasis on a wide range of spatial and temporal scales, and illustrate this with genomic and population (rRNA gene) data from selected 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".