MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1970320488 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2014-0317

Implications of exotic <i>Pinus radiata</i> plantations for macrofungal diversity in the Urdaibai Biosphere Reserve (northern Spain)

2015· article· en· W1970320488 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Esti Sarrionandia, Ibai Olariaga, R. Picón, Miren K. Duñabeitia, Anabel Robredo, N. Rodríguez, Isabel Salcedo

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpecies richnessPinus radiataBiologyEcologyRadiataBiodiversitySpecies diversityHabitatCoarse woody debrisForestryGeographyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To analyze the implications of exotic radiata pine (Pinus radiata D. Don) plantations for macrofungal diversity, a comparative mycocoenological survey was conducted over three consecutive years in pine plantations and native oak forests (Quercus robur L.) in the Urdaibai Biosphere Reserve. Macrofungal diversity was analyzed at species and community levels, and multivariate techniques were used to obtain insight into the fungal community in all functional groups. A total of 513 species was recorded, with ectomycorrhizal fungi being the most abundant, followed by the lignicolous saprotrophs. Measurements at both the overall level and the plot level showed that oak forests were richer in macrofungal species than pine plantations. The two ecosystems shared 107 species, but they possessed distinct species assemblages in all functional groups, as confirmed by PERMANOVA analysis. Although more abundant in oak stands, host-specific fungi were recorded in both ecosystems, revealing that exotic pine plantations can easily access fungal inocula from natural pine forests in the vicinity. However, even though the macrofungal richness in plantations is comparable with that in other native conifer forests in Europe, the community was made up of generalists, i.e., species that were not habitat specialists. In contrast, rarely reported, uncommon fungi were recorded in oak plots, revealing the importance of residual, native forest patches for fungal conservation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions→French-language works237,207→