The interplay between<i>Pinus sylvestris</i>, its root hemiparasite,<i>Melampyrum pratense</i>, and ectomycorrhizal fungi: Influences on plant growth and reproduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the extensive literature on mutual interactions between plants and mycorrhizal fungi, and host plants and parasitic plants, little is known about the outcomes of interactions when the three organisms exist in concert with one another. We investigated, in a microcosm experiment, the interactions between Pinus sylvestris L. and the root hemiparasitic Melampyrum pratense L. in the presence/absence of ectomycorrhizal (EM) fungi. Mycorrhizal infection significantly increased the biomass of P. sylvestris, whereas the parasitic infection decreased it. Concentration of host phosphorus was greatly increased by the presence of EM fungi. M. pratense plants attached to mycorrhizal pines had higher biomass and produced more flowers than those growing with non-mycorrhizal pines. We attribute the stimulation of parasite performance in the presence of EM fungi to enhanced nutrient availability to the host individuals, and to increased photosynthetic capacity of hosts as a result of increased above-ground biomass.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".