Prairie restoration promotes the abundance and diversity of mutualistic arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predicting how biological communities assemble in restored ecosystems can assist in conservation efforts, but most research has focused on plants, with relatively little attention paid to soil microbial organisms that plants interact with. Arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi are an ecologically significant functional group of soil microbes that form mutualistic symbioses with plants and could therefore respond positively to plant community restoration. To evaluate the effects of plant community restoration on AM fungi, we compared AM fungal abundance, species richness, and community composition of five annually cultivated, conventionally managed agricultural fields with paired adjacent retired agricultural fields that had undergone prairie restoration 5-9 years prior to sampling. We hypothesized that restoration stimulates AM fungal abundance and species richness, particularly for disturbance-sensitive taxa, and that gains of new taxa would not displace AM fungal species present prior to restoration due to legacy effects. AM fungal abundance was quantified by measuring soil spore density and root colonization. AM fungal species richness and community composition were determined in soils and plant roots using DNA high-throughput sequencing. Soil spore density was 2.3 times higher in restored prairies compared to agricultural fields, but AM fungal root colonization did not differ between land use types. AM fungal species richness was 2.7 and 1.4 times higher in restored prairies versus agricultural fields for soil and roots, respectively. The abundance of Glomeraceae, a disturbance-tolerant family, decreased by 25% from agricultural to restored prairie soils but did not differ in plant roots. The abundance of Claroideoglomeraceae and Diversisporaceae, both disturbance-sensitive families, was 4.6 and 3.2 times higher in restored prairie versus agricultural soils, respectively. Species turnover was higher than expected relative to a null model, indicating that AM fungal species were gained by replacement. Our findings demonstrate that restoration can promote a relatively rapid increase in the abundance and diversity of soil microbial communities that had been degraded by decades of intensive land use, and community compositional change can be predicted by the disturbance tolerance of soil microbial taxonomic and functional groups.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".