Feasibility of using red pigment producing fungi to stain wood for decorative applications
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research investigated the use of red pigment producing fungi in controlled inoculation into woody substrates for decorative applications. Two Fusarium species isolated from red-stained wood and two strains of Arthrographis cuboidea capable of producing red stain in culture were inoculated onto sugar maple ( Acer saccharum Marsh.), incubated for 6–14 weeks, and evaluated for their ability to produce a high-saturation, penetrating stain. Both Fusarium species failed to produce significant pigmentation either externally or internally. Both strains of A. cuboidea produced high amounts of surface and penetrating red stain within a moderate incubation period (over 80% of the wood samples stained by 10 weeks of incubation) but were capable of doing so only under sterile or semisterile conditions. Production of red stain did not differ between A. cuboidea isolates except at 6 and 8 weeks where isolate ELS-1 had significantly higher internal red stain. It was also found that an increase in incubation time for A. cuboidea past 8 weeks led to increasing amounts of blue pigment on external wood surfaces. The findings indicate that A. cuboidea is suitable for production of red pigmentation on decorative wood applications only if utilized under sterile or semisterile conditions and incubation is halted before blue pigment begins to form.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it