Data from: Rainfall events stimulate episodic associative nitrogen fixation in switchgrass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Associative N2 fixation (ANF) is widespread but poorly characterized, limiting our ability to estimate global inputs from N2 fixation. In some places, ANF rates are at or below detection most of the time, but occasionally and unpredictably spiking to very high rates. Here we test the hypothesis that plant phenology and rainfall events stimulate ANF episodes. We measured ANF in intact soil cores in switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) in Michigan, USA. We used rain exclusion shelters to impose three rainfall treatments with each receiving 60 mm of water over a 20-day period but at different frequencies. We concurrently established a treatment that received ambient rainfall, and all four treatments were replicated four times. To assess the effects of plant phenology, we measured ANF at key phenological stages in the ambient treatment. To assess the effects of rainfall, we measured ANF immediately before and immediately after each wetting event in each treatment involving rainfall manipulation. We found that the previous day's rainfall could explain 29% of the variation in ANF rates within the ambient treatment alone, and that bulk soil C:N ratio was also positively correlated with ANF, explaining 18% of the variation alone. Wetting events increased ANF and the magnitude of response to wetting increased with the amount of water added and decreased with the amount of inorganic N added in water. ANF episodes thus appear to be driven primarily by wetting events. Wetting events likely increase C availability, promote microbial growth, and make rhizosphere conditions conducive to ANF.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 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".