<i>Endoconidioma populi</i>from aspen and alder: phylogeny, and variations in cleistopycnidial morphology and their ecological implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cleistopycnidial ontogeny and sequences of nuclear internal transcribed spacers (ITS) and large subunits (LSU) were compared for five strains of Endoconidioma populi Tsuneda et al.: three from trembling aspen and two from alder. The cleistopycnidia of two of the aspen strains, including the type strain, were subglobose to flask-shaped (mostly 35–100 µm × 30–60 µm), and consisted solely of meristematic cells with thick cell walls that were heavily impregnated with melanin granules. Peridial cells were not visibly differentiated from locular cells and were also capable of forming endoconidia. Endoconidia were released from one to several sites of the cleistopycnidium by the dissolution of peridial cell wall. The alder strains shared these characteristics, except that their cleistopycnidia released both endoconidia and conidiogenous cells. Unlike those four strains, cleistopycnidia of the third aspen strain were cylindrical, often exceeding 500 µm in length, branched, and possessed a peridium of textura angularis that developed from short, determinate hyphae. Conidiogenous cells contained abundant lipid bodies that were not mobilized until the onset of endoconidiogenesis. The peridium at the basal area was prone to breakage by external forces, indicating that the individual cleistopycnidium, as a whole, functions as a dispersal unit. A small number of ITS nucleotide differences among strains corresponded to their observed morphological differences and host association. Phylogenetic analyses suggested a close relationship of E. populi with Hormonema carpetanum Bills, Peláez & Ruibal, and Coniozyma leucospermi (Crous & Denman) Crous.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".