<i>Ascophyllum</i> and its symbionts. X. Ultrastructure of the interaction between <i>A. nodosum</i> (Phaeophyceae) and <i>Mycophycias ascophylli</i> (Ascomycetes)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The symbiosis of a brown alga, Ascophyllum nodosum (L.) Le Jolis and its obligate fungal symbiont, Mycophycias ascophylli (Cotton) Kohlmeyer and Volkmann-Kohlmeyer, was studied using transmission electron microscopy. A high quality of cell preservation was achieved after propane-freezing and freeze substitution; this allowed us to observe the interaction of the symbiosis without extensive artifacts. The fungus was found in the middle portion of cortical-cell walls, and at the edge of medullary cells and air-bladder filaments, but never close to host cell protoplasm. Host cell-wall modification was limited to a short distance around the hyphae. A sheath with electron-dense materials around the fungus was found in the older hyphae, but not in the hyphal tips. A range of hyphal ultrastructure was observed from cells with dense cytoplasm, absent to slight vacuolation and with well-defined organelles, to highly vacuolated cells with little cytoplasm and poorly defined organelles, to senescent cells that were often collapsed with no recognizable organelles. No sign of typical cytological resistance responses was observed in host cells, thus confirming the nonantagonistic nature of the two symbionts.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".