Differential Responses of Soil Microbial and Carbon‐Nitrogen Processes to Future Environmental Changes Across Soil Depths and Environmental Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Accurately predicting carbon‐climate feedbacks relies on understanding the environmental factors regulating soil organic carbon (SOC) storage and dynamics. Here, we employed a microbial ecological model (MEND), driven by downscaled output data from six Earth system models under two Shared Socio‐economic Pathways (SSP1‐2.6 and SSP5‐8.5) scenarios, to simulate long‐term soil biogeochemical processes. We aim to analyze the responses of soil microbial and carbon‐nitrogen (C‐N) processes to changes in environmental factors, including litter input (L), soil moisture (W) and temperature (T), and soil pH, in a broadleaf forest (BF) and a pine forest (PF). For the entire soil layer in both forests, we found that, compared to the baseline period of 2009–2020, the mean SOC during 2081–2100 increased by 40.9%–90.6% under the L or T change scenarios, versus 5.2%–31.0% under the W change scenario. However, soil moisture emerged as a key regulator of SOC, MBC and inorganic N dynamics in the topsoil of BF and PF. For example, W change led to SOC gain of 5.5%–37.2%, compared to the SOC loss of 15.5%–18.0% under L or T scenario. Additionally, a further reduction in soil pH by 0.2 units in the BF, representing the acid rain effect, significantly resulted in an additional SOC gain by 14.2%–21.3%, compared to the LTW (simultaneous changes in the three factors) scenario. These results indicate that the results derived solely from topsoil may not be extrapolated to the entire soil profile. Overall, this study significantly advances our comprehension of how different environmental factors impact the dynamics of SOC and the implications they have for climate change.
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".