Impact of changing climate on bryophyte contributions to terrestrial water, carbon, and nitrogen cycles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bryophytes, including the lineages of mosses, liverworts, and hornworts, are the second-largest photoautotroph group on Earth. Recent work across terrestrial ecosystems has highlighted how bryophytes retain and control water, fix substantial amounts of carbon (C), and contribute to nitrogen (N) cycles in forests (boreal, temperate, and tropical), tundra, peatlands, grasslands, and deserts. Understanding how changing climate affects bryophyte contributions to global cycles in different ecosystems is of primary importance. However, because of their small physical size, bryophytes have been largely ignored in research on water, C, and N cycles at global scales. Here, we review the literature on how bryophytes influence global biogeochemical cycles, and we highlight that while some aspects of global change represent critical tipping points for survival, bryophytes may also buffer many ecosystems from change due to their capacity for water, C, and N uptake and storage. However, as the thresholds of resistance of bryophytes to temperature and precipitation regime changes are mostly unknown, it is challenging to predict how long this buffering capacity will remain functional. Furthermore, as ecosystems shift their global distribution in response to changing climate, the size of different bryophyte-influenced biomes will change, resulting in shifts in the magnitude of bryophyte impacts on global ecosystem functions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".