Microbial controls over soil priming effects under chronic nitrogen and phosphorus additions in subtropical forests.

The soil priming effect (PE), defined as the modification of soil organic matter decomposition by labile carbon (C) inputs, is known to influence C storage in terrestrial ecosystems. However, how chronic nutrient addition, particularly in leguminous and non-leguminous forests, will affect PE through interaction with nutrient (e.g., nitrogen and phosphorus) availability is still unclear. Therefore, we collected soils from leguminous and non-leguminous subtropical plantations across a suite of historical nutrient addition regimes. We added 13C-labeled glucose to investigate how background soil nutrient conditions and microbial communities affect priming and its potential microbial mechanisms. Glucose addition increased soil organic matter decomposition and prompted positive priming in all soils, regardless of dominant overstory tree species or fertilizer treatment. In non-leguminous soil, only combined nitrogen and phosphorus addition led to a higher positive priming than the control. Conversely, soils beneath N-fixing leguminous plants responded positively to P addition alone, as well as to joint NP addition compared to control. Using DNA stable-isotope probing, high-throughput quantitative PCR, enzyme assays and microbial C substrate utilization, we found that positive PE was associated with increased microbial C utilization, accompanied by an increase in microbial community activity, nutrient-related gene abundance, and enzyme activities. Our findings suggest that the balance between soil available N and P effects on the PE,  was dependent on rhizosphere microbial community composition. Furthermore, these findings highlight the roles of the interaction between plants and their symbiotic microbial communities in affecting soil priming and improve our understanding of the potential microbial pathways underlying soil PEs.

When are hypotheses useful in ecology and evolution?

Research hypotheses have been a cornerstone of science since before Galileo. Many have argued that hypotheses (1) encourage discovery of mechanisms, and (2) reduce bias-both features that should increase transferability and reproducibility. However, we are entering a new era of big data and highly predictive models where some argue the hypothesis is outmoded. We hypothesized that hypothesis use has declined in ecology and evolution since the 1990s, given the substantial advancement of tools further facilitating descriptive, correlative research. Alternatively, hypothesis use may have become more frequent due to the strong recommendation by some journals and funding agencies that submissions have hypothesis statements. Using a detailed literature analysis (N = 268 articles), we found prevalence of hypotheses in eco-evo research is very low (6.7%-26%) and static from 1990-2015, a pattern mirrored in an extensive literature search (N = 302,558 articles). Our literature review also indicates that neither grant success nor citation rates were related to the inclusion of hypotheses, which may provide disincentive for hypothesis formulation. Here, we review common justifications for avoiding hypotheses and present new arguments based on benefits to the individual researcher. We argue that stating multiple alternative hypotheses increases research clarity and precision, and is more likely to address the mechanisms for observed patterns in nature. Although hypotheses are not always necessary, we expect their continued and increased use will help our fields move toward greater understanding, reproducibility, prediction, and effective conservation of nature.