MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1805379632 · doi:10.1139/b2012-092

Detection and localization of the endophyte<i>Undifilum oxytropis</i>in locoweed tissues

2012· article· en· W1805379632 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roxanna Reyna, Peter Cooke, Daniel Grum, Daniel Cook, Rebecca Creamer

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and fungal interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNew Jersey Agricultural Experiment StationNew Mexico State UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEndophyteBiologyHyphaBotanyFungusSwainsonineVascular bundlePith

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Poisoning of livestock owing to grazing on locoweeds results in significant economic losses in the western United States. Some Oxytropis spp. locoweeds contain a seed-transmitted endophytic fungus, Undifilum oxytropis, which produces the toxic alkaloid swainsonine. We sought to localize and characterize growth patterns of the fungus within leaves and petioles of Oxytropis lambertii Pursh and Oxytropis sericea Nutt. to help define the types of interactions between the fungus and its hosts. Vegetative hyphae were observed within locoweed tissues using integrated imaging. Topographical images from scanning electron microscopy revealed the presence of the endophyte in the pith tissue of petioles. The fungus was identified between plant cells but did not appear to penetrate host cells. Transmission electron microscopy images of thin sections revealed that hyphae were closely associated with host cell walls. Oxytropis sericea was innoculated with green fluorescent protein-transformed U. oxytropis and observed by confocal microscopy, confirming the presence of the endophyte hyphae in leaves and petioles. The fungus was identified only in the pith of petioles using fluorescence and in the vascular bundle throughout extracellular spaces in leaves. These results revealed no signs of a pathogenic interaction between plant and fungus and support the hypothesis of a mutualistic or commensal relationship.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicPlant and fungal interactionsFrench-language works237,207