Local Community Assembly Mechanisms and the Size of Species Pool Jointly Explain the Beta Diversity of Soil Fungi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fungi play vital regulatory roles in terrestrial ecosystems. Local community assembly mechanisms, including deterministic and stochastic processes, as well as the size of regional species pools (gamma diversity), typically influence overall soil microbial community beta diversity patterns. However, there is limited evidence supporting their direct and indirect effects on beta diversity of different soil fungal functional groups in forest ecosystems. To address this gap, we collected 1606 soil samples from a 25-ha subtropical forest plot in southern China. Our goal was to determine the direct effects and indirect effects of regional species pools on the beta diversity of soil fungi, specifically arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM), ectomycorrhizal (EcM), plant-pathogenic, and saprotrophic fungi. We quantified the effects of soil properties, mycorrhizal tree abundances, and topographical factors on soil fungal diversity. The beta diversity of plant-pathogenic fungi was predominantly influenced by the size of the species pool. In contrast, the beta diversity of EcM fungi was primarily driven indirectly through community assembly processes. Neither of them had significant effects on the beta diversity of AM and saprotrophic fungi. Our results highlight that the direct and indirect effects of species pools on the beta diversity of soil functional groups of fungi can significantly differ even within a relatively small area. They also demonstrate the independent and combined effects of various factors in regulating the diversities of soil functional groups of fungi. Consequently, it is crucial to study the fungal community not only as a whole but also by considering different functional groups within the community.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".