Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35572693›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2022

Responses of Biocrust and Associated Soil Bacteria to Novel Climates Are Not Tightly Coupled.

Anita Antoninka, Peter F Chuckran, Rebecca L Mau, Mandy L Slate, Brent D Mishler, Melvin J Oliver, Kirsten K Coe, Llo R Stark, Kirsten M Fisher, Matthew A Bowker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Anita AntoninkaSchool of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, United States.
Peter F ChuckranDepartment of Biological Sciences, Center for Ecosystem Science and Society (ECOSS), Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, United States.
Rebecca L MauDepartment of Biological Sciences, Center for Ecosystem Science and Society (ECOSS), Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, United States.
Mandy L SlateDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, United States.
Brent D MishlerDepartment of Integrative Biology, University and Jepson Herbaria, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Melvin J OliverInterdisciplinary Plant Group, Division of Plant Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, United States.
Kirsten K CoeDepartment of Biology, Middlebury College, Middlebury, VT, United States.
Llo R StarkSchool of Life Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV, United States.
Kirsten M FisherDepartment of Biological Sciences, California State University, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Matthew A BowkerSchool of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Climate change is expanding drylands even as land use practices degrade them. Representing ∼40% of Earth's terrestrial surface, drylands rely on biological soil crusts (biocrusts) for key ecosystem functions including soil stability, biogeochemical cycling, and water capture. Understanding how biocrusts adapt to climate change is critical to understanding how dryland ecosystems will function with altered climate. We investigated the sensitivity of biocrusts to experimentally imposed novel climates to track changes in productivity and stability under both warming and cooling scenarios. We established three common gardens along an elevational-climate gradient on the Colorado Plateau. Mature biocrusts were collected from each site and reciprocally transplanted intact. Over 20 months we monitored visible species composition and cover, chlorophyll a, and the composition of soil bacterial communities using high throughput sequencing. We hypothesized that biocrusts replanted at their home site would show local preference, and biocrusts transplanted to novel environments would maintain higher cover and stability at elevations higher than their origin, compared to at elevations lower than their origin. We expected responses of the visible biocrust cover and soil bacterial components of the biocrust community to be coupled, with later successional taxa showing higher sensitivity to novel environments. Only high elevation sourced biocrusts maintained higher biocrust cover and community stability at their site of origin. Biocrusts from all sources had higher cover and stability in the high elevation garden. Later successional taxa decreased cover in low elevation gardens, suggesting successional reversal with warming. Visible community composition was influenced by both source and transplant environment. In contrast, soil bacterial community composition was not influenced by transplant environments but retained fidelity to the source. Thus, responses of the visible and soil bacterial components of the biocrust community were not coupled. Synthesis: Our results suggest biocrust communities are sensitive to climate change, and loss of species and function can be expected, while associated soil bacteria may be buffered against rapid change.

Indexed as

bacterial diversitybiological soil crustclimate changecommon gardencommunity stabilitydrylandlichensmosses

Identifiers

PMID35572693
PMCPMC9096946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.