Fast- and slow-growing subalpine fir produce lesions of different sizes in response to inoculation with a blue-stain fungus associated with <i>Dryocoetes confusus</i> (Coleoptera: Scolytidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trees with low vigor and reduced radial growth may be more susceptible to attack by bark beetles because of reduced host defenses. Fungi associated with bark beetles may be used to elicit an induced defense response from the host. A blue-stain fungus isolated from Dryocoetes confusus Swaine was used to examine the morphology of the hypersensitive response of fast- and slow-growing subalpine fir trees in British Columbia. Twenty fast-growing and 20 slow-growing trees were inoculated with the blue-stain isolate, and the dimensions of the resultant lesions were compared between fast- and slow-growing trees and between fungus and control treatments at 3, 7, 10, 17, and 41 d after inoculation. The length and width of the lesions was greater in response to fungus versus control treatments at 7, 10, 17, and 41 d after inoculation. The length of the lesions was significantly greater in fast- than in slow-growing trees at 7, 10, and 17 d after inoculation. There was no significant difference in the size of the lesions between fast- and slow-growing trees 41 d after inoculation. The temporary difference in the size of the lesions between fast- and slow-growing trees suggests that host vigor affects the induced defense response within a certain time frame.Key words: Abies lasiocarpa, Dryocoetes confusus, host vigor, defense, blue-stain fungi, Ophiostoma.
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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".