Myxomycetes on the bark of Banksia attenuata and B. menziesii (Proteaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Myxomycetes on the bark of dead Banksia attenuata and B. menziesii from the Perth metropolitan area of Western Australia were surveyed by the moist chamber technique, to determine whether the flora was similar on both hosts and what were the most important variables that determined the distribution of the most common species. Twenty-seven species of myxomycetes were recovered, including six new records for Australia (Comatricha rigidireta, Echinostelium elachiston, Paradiacheopsis cf. cribrata, P. rigida, Stemonitopsis amoena and S. cf. hyperopta). Members of the order Stemonitales comprised the largest number of species, whereas members of the Liceales occurred on the most bark pieces. The most common species were Licea kleistobolus, Echinostelium minutum, Comatricha elegans, Cribraria minutissima and Paradiacheopsis fimbriata. Overall, B. menziesii and B. attenuata had very similar myxomycete productivity, diversity and species assemblage, as did the tops and bottoms of the logs. It was concluded that they provided very similar microhabitats for myxomycetes. Both pH and the relative moisture content of the bark had an effect on myxomycete productivity. Bark decomposition level, pH and bark surface (top or bottom) were the most important variables determining the distribution of the most common myxomycete species.
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 | 0.001 | 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".