henhaobio
Sign in

The ISME JournalEcologyPeer-reviewed journal article

Taxonomic filtering accompanies functional expansion during long-term soil restoration

Tim GoodalliD, Susheel Bhanu BusiiD, Briony JonesiD, Amy C. ThorpeiD, Robert Iwan GriffithsiD, John W. RedheadiD, Lucy HulmesiD, Sarah HulmesiD, Lucy E. RiddingiD, Jodey PeytoniD, Gloria Pereira, Hyun S. GweoniD, Daniel S. ReadiD, Richard F. PywelliD

PDFDOIPreprint

Abstract

The restoration of species-rich calcareous grasslands is a critical conservation objective, yet the recovery of the invisible below-ground microbiome remains poorly quantified compared to above-ground vegetation. Using a unique 143-year land-use chronosequence on Salisbury Plain, UK, we investigated the trajectory of ecosystem reassembly across arable, regenerating (23 and 67 years), and ancient grasslands. By integrating vegetation surveys with soil physiochemistry, microbial profiling, and shotgun metagenomics, we identified a profound functional decoupling between floral and edaphic recovery. While vegetation diversity recovered relatively rapidly, approaching saturation within 23-67 years, soil properties exhibited persistent legacy effects and slow convergence. Bacterial richness decreased with restoration age, reflecting a transition from disturbance-adapted copiotrophs in arable soils to a specialised, oligotrophic community in ancient sites. This taxonomic contraction was conversely matched by an expansion in functional potential, driven by the emergence of specific taxa (e.g., Microthrixaceae, Aquihabitans sp.) and metabolic pathways associated with complex carbon cycling and stress tolerance. Crucially, the soil ecosystem did not reach equilibrium even after 67 years, characterised by persistent legacy phosphorus and a slow accumulation of soil organic matter. These findings suggest that passive regeneration alone may be insufficient for full soil functional recovery, and that strategies targeting microbial assembly and long-term carbon dynamics warrant further evaluation.

Citations
2
FWCI
7.01
Field percentile
top 4%

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.