Land Use Modifies the Inherent Effect of Soil Properties on Soil Bacterial Communities in Humid Tropical Watersheds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil bacterial communities are vital for ecosystem functioning in the humid tropics, yet their response to land-use change remains poorly understood. This knowledge gap is exacerbated by the lack of long-term studies. We employed a space-for-time substitution approach to assess the effects of land-use intensification on soil bacterial communities across a gradient of anthropogenic disturbance in Trinidad. Three sub-watersheds (Arouca = pristine, Maracas = intermediate, Tacarigua = intensive) were selected, each containing adjacent forest, grassland, and agricultural land uses. We combined geophysical soil apparent electrical conductivity (ECa-directed) sampling with 16S rDNA gene amplicon sequencing to characterize bacterial communities and their relationships with soil and landscape properties. Soil properties were the primary determinant of bacterial community structure, explaining 56% of the variation (p < 0.001), with pH, clay content, hygroscopic water, and nutrient availability as key drivers. Bacterial α-diversity differed significantly among sub-watersheds (p < 0.01), with Tacarigua exhibiting lower richness and diversity compared to Arouca and Maracas, but not across land uses. While a core microbiome of ten bacterial families was ubiquitous across land uses, indicating a stable foundational community, land-use intensification significantly altered β-diversity (p < 0.01 among sub-watersheds). Agricultural soils showed the greatest divergence from forest soils (p < 0.05), with a marked decline in key Proteobacterial families (e.g., Xanthomonadaceae, Pseudomonadaceae) involved in nutrient cycling and plant growth promotion. Although inherent soil properties shape the core microbiome, land-use intensification acts as a strong secondary filter, shifting soil bacterial communities toward more stress-resistant Firmicutes with potentially less diverse functions. Our findings demonstrate the utility of integrating space-for-time substitution with molecular profiling to predict long-term microbial responses to environmental change in vulnerable tropical ecosystems.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".