Reduced herbivore resistance from a novel grass–endophyte association
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Endophytic fungi in agricultural grasses confer agronomic advantages but can be detrimental to the health and production of grazing mammals. Attempts have been made to resolve this dilemma by creating novel associations of high‐yielding grass cultivars and ‘safe endophytes’ that do not naturally co‐occur. Recently, researchers created a novel association by combining a Moroccan strain of Neotyphodium coenophialum, called AR542, with the tall fescue Festuca arundinacea cultivar Georgia 5. This novel association is marketed commercially and has no doubt become naturalized; it is therefore important to assess its impact on other organisms. The bird‐cherry‐oat aphid Rhopalosiphum padi uses tall fescue as an alternative host. We assessed the performance of R. padi feeding on Georgia 5 that had been artificially infected with AR542, naturally infected by the common strain (CS) of N. coenophialum or was endophyte‐free (EF). We cross‐factored these three levels of endophyte infection with four levels of nitrogen fertilizer, and used two different methods of assessing aphid performance, clip‐cages and enclosed populations. Endophyte‐infected plants produced approximately 20% more dry mass than EF plants. In both the clip‐cage and enclosed‐population experiments, aphid populations grew fastest on the EF plants, slower on AR542‐infected plants and slowest (or not at all) on the CS‐infected plants. Synthesis and applications. Our results suggest that AR542 infection does not provide the same degree of protection from aphids as the commonly occurring CS infection. If similar results are found for other invertebrate herbivores, then the use of this novel endophyte association may be less useful than previously thought. The widespread conversion of tall fescue pastures, currently infected with the CS endophyte, to pastures infected with AR542 could result in a general increase in the prevalence of cereal aphids and, potentially, the diseases that they spread. However, such conversion might be beneficial to native invertebrate herbivores.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".