Saltmarsh reclamation enhances plant species richness and reduces soil macrofaunal biomass by regulating soil properties through elevation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globally, saltmarsh reclamation results in significant losses of coastal wetlands. However, the impacts on above- and below-ground biodiversity and the underlying mechanisms remain poorly understood. We hypothesized that saltmarsh reclamation differently affects plant and soil macrofaunal communities by regulating soil properties through elevation. To test this, we surveyed 36 plots in Sheyang County, eastern China and used t-tests, redundancy analysis, and structural equation modeling to examine differences and the direct/indirect effects of elevation and soil physico-chemical properties on plant and soil macrofaunal diversity. Results showed that plant species richness in reclaimed areas was significantly higher than that in saltmarshes, whereas the total and average biomass of soil macrofauna exhibited an inverse pattern. Plant species richness positively associated with elevation but negatively correlated with soil available phosphorus (AP) and electrical conductivity (EC). The total and average biomass of soil macrofauna positively correlated with soil ammonium nitrogen (AN), total nitrogen (TN), total potassium (TK), and inversely related to total phosphorus (TP), elevation, mud content (SMC). Elevation indirectly increased plant species richness via soil water content (SWC), total carbon (TC), AN, and nitrate nitrogen (NN), but decreased it through bulk density (BD). For soil macrofauna, elevation indirectly reduced total biomass via SWC, TC, and AN, while indirectly increasing it through available potassium (AK). These findings elucidate the mechanisms driving above- and below-ground biodiversity changes following saltmarsh reclamation, providing a comprehensive understanding of these ecological alterations.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".