Ectomycorrhizal colonization of greenhouse-grown Douglas-fir (<i>Pseudotsuga</i> <i>menziesii</i>) seedlings by inoculum associated with the roots of refuge plants sampled from a Douglas-fir forest in the southern interior of British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) seedlings were grown in the greenhouse in a sterilized mixture of forest soil and vermiculite, which had been inoculated with root fragments from one of six different ectomycorrhizal under story plant species (Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (L.) Spreng, P. menziessi, Salix bebbiana Bebb, Alnus viridis subsp. sinuata (Regel) Ä. Löve & and D. Löve (alder), Betula papyrifera Marsh. (paper birch), Populus tremuloides Michx.) and arbuscular mycorrhizal Calamagrostis rubescens Buckl. (pinegrass) sampled from a dry Douglas-fir forest in the southern interior of British Columbia. The overall objective of the present study was to investigate the inoculum potential of these ectomycorrhizal roots for colonizing Douglas-fir seedlings. A total of seven ectomycorrhizal morphotypes formed on the bioassay seedlings, which were colonized by all treatments except the control. Seedlings growing in soil inoculated with root fragments of Douglas-fir, Arctostaphylos, and paper birch had greater ectomycorrhizal richness and a higher percentage of colonized fine roots relative to the pinegrass and alder treatments. The community of ectomycorrhizal fungi that colonized the bioassay seedlings differed from that associated with some of the same refuge plants assessed in a previously reported field-based study at this site. Different ectomy corrhizal fungal colonization strategies and the retention of refuge plants are discussed in relation to the colonization of outplanted seedlings following clearcutting.Key words: ectomycorrhizae, refuge plants, inoculum potential, soil bioassay, Pseudotsuga menziesii.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".