Life history strategies to study the succession of H2-oxidizing bacteria and their ecological role along H2 concentration gradients in upland soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recent discovery of atmospheric chemosynthesis has caused a paradigm shift in the way H2-oxidizing bacteria (HOB) are examined. The field has transitioned from the consideration of HOB as a specialized functional group benefiting from the energy potential of H2 for mixotrophic growth or persistence to a versatile group of bacteria using multiple trace gases. We discuss four life history strategies supported by H2, namely chemolithoautotrophic growth, mixotrophic growth, persistence, and atmospheric chemosynthesis. There is experimental evidence supporting the role of HOB in various ecosystem services beyond the uptake of H2 including, for instance, carbon cycling, plant growth promotion, and primary production. Decoupling between the intensity of HOB activation in soil and compositional change of microbial communities remains puzzling, highlighting our poor understanding of the ecological role of HOB. We call for new experimental approaches to delineate the interactions between HOB and the other members of the community. We propose a dedicated framework integrating life history strategies of HOB for mechanistic assessment of microbial interactions and processes supported by H2 in soil.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".