Competition of<i>Scleroconidioma sphagnicola</i>with fungi decomposing spruce litter needles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study addressed competition of Scleroconidioma sphagnicola Tsuneda, Currah & Thormann with saprotrophic ascomycetes and basidiomycetes. We isolated this fungus, previously considered as a preferentially necrotrophic parasite of moss, from spruce needle litter. Competition of Scleroconidioma sphagnicola was simulated with strains of the autochthonous litter colonizers Ceuthospora pinastri (Fr.) Höhn., Chalara longipes (Preus) Cooke, Setulipes androsaceus (L.) Antonín ( Marasmius androsaceus (L.) Fr.), and Mollisia minutella (Sacc.) Rehm and the wood-decaying fungus Hypholoma fasciculare (Huds.) Quél. Pairings were performed on agar plates with two types of low-nutrient medium made from spruce litter needles. Reisolation on nutritionally rich agar medium following the competition revealed that Sleroconidioma sphagnicola was mostly successfully reisolated even though apparently being replaced by the mycelium of other fungi. It formed strongly melanised mycelium and microsclerotia that seem to be responsible for its resistance to fungal competition. All tested strains of needle litter colonizers were outcompeted by Hypholoma fasciculare. Enzymatic screening aimed at semiquantitative assay of polyphenol oxidase, peroxidase, and tyrosinace revealed that Scleroconidioma sphagnicola, together with other strains, was able to produce polyphenol oxidase and peroxidase on various nutritional media. Activity of tyrosinase was detected only for Hypholoma fasciculare. Previous records of Scleroconidioma sphagnicola from moss, wood, and our isolations from spruce litter suggest that this species possesses an ability to occupy a wide spectrum of niches.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".