Distribution and frequency of mating types in the asexual fungus <i>Septoria passerinii</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four hundred and sixty-nine Septoria passerinii isolates sampled from 15 widely distributed fields in North Dakota and two in western Minnesota were used to analyze the distribution and frequency of mating type idiomorphs using a multiplex polymerase chain reaction. Two sites, Williston, North Dakota, and Langdon, North Dakota, were sampled in a hierarchical fashion, and the remaining 15 sites were sampled in a random stratified fashion. The χ2 test revealed that, with clone-corrected data, equal frequencies of both mating types occurred within the whole field at both Williston and Langdon as well as at 11 of 15 sites sampled with a random stratified method. Only one of the two mating types was found at each of four sites. In two of those sites, this finding could have resulted from small sample sizes rather than evolutionary forces. Equal frequencies of the two mating types are consistent with a sexually reproducing population. From the results of this study, we conclude that, despite a teleomorph never having been found in the field, sexual recombination is probably occurring in S. passerinii in many areas of North Dakota.
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) | 0.000 | 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".