MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mutualism variation in the nodulation response to nitrate

2010· article· en· W1557096936 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Evolutionary Biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLegume Nitrogen Fixing Symbiosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMutualism (biology)RhizobiaBiologyCoevolutionRhizobiumSymbiosisNatural selectionNitrateEcologyEcosystemExperimental evolutionEvolutionary biologySelection (genetic algorithm)BacteriaGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The evolution of mutualisms under novel selective pressures will play a key role in ecosystem responses to environmental change. Because fixed nitrogen is traded in plant–rhizobium mutualisms, increasing N availability in the soil is predicted to alter coevolution of these interactions. Legumes typically decrease the number of associations (nodules) with rhizobia in response to nitrate, but the evolutionary dynamics of this response remain unknown. We grew plant and rhizobium genotype combinations in three N environments to assess the coevolutionary potential of the nodule nitrate response in natural communities of plants and rhizobia. We found evidence for coevolutionary genetic variation for nodulation in response to nitrate (G × G × E interaction), suggesting that the mutualism response to N deposition will depend on the combination of partner genotypes. Thus, the nitrate response is not a fixed mechanism in plant–rhizobium symbioses, but instead is potentially subject to natural selection and dynamic coevolution.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it