Response of ectomycorrhizal community structure to gap opening in natural and managed temperate beech-dominated forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data on the impact of forest management practices on ectomycorrhizal community structure remains fragmentary and mainly originates from studies in northern coniferous forests. This study focuses on a comparison of ectomycorrhizal communities between canopy gaps and closed canopy areas within natural and managed beech-dominated forests at four locations in Europe. We used high resolution rDNA techniques to identify ectomycorrhiza-forming fungi and attempted to extract potential stand-, gap-, soil-, and selected environmentally derived variables by applying multivariate analysis and ordination for pooling of ecological groups of ectomycorrhiza. A significant reduction of diversity indices, ectomycorrhizal and fine root dynamics, in gaps in comparison with closed canopy stands indicates an effect of forest management practice and the high importance of maintaining and protecting natural forest areas for conservation of soil biodiversity and forest genetic resources. The ordination analysis revealed three groups of ectomycorrhiza correlated with changing environmental conditions. The litter and soil pH, number of beech seedlings, and presence of a gap had a pronounced effect on the ectomycorrhizal community. Combined analysis of ectomycorrhiza and environmental factors using correspondence analysis provided an insight into the ecological preferences of the analysed species and confirmed that environmental factors drive ectomycorrhizal community changes.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".