Influencing Factors and Consequences: The Effect of Root System on Microbial Community Dynamics under Soil Warming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper titled "Soil warming increases the number of growing bacterial taxa but not their growth rates" was published in the journal Science Advances on February 23, 2024, by authors Metze D., Schnecker J., de Charlan C.L.N., Bhattarai B., Verbruggen E., Ostonen I., Janssens I.A., Sigurdsson B.D., Hausmann B., Kaiser C., and Richter A., are from institutions such as the Center for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science at the University of Vienna, Austria, the Clinical Microbiology Department of the Experimental Medicine Department at the Medical University of Vienna, Austria, and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Larsenburg, Austria. The study investigated the effects of long-term soil warming on soil bacterial and archaeal communities in subarctic meadows through field experiments and quantitative stable isotope probe (qSIP) technology. The study found that although soil warming led to more bacterial species participating in growth, it did not significantly increase their average growth rate. This study provides new insights into the response mechanisms of soil microorganisms in the context of global warming.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".