Patterns of species composition and distribution of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in arid regions of southwestern North America and Namibia, Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungal communities at 13 sampling sites in two arid regions (Chihuahuan and Sonoran Deserts) and semi-arid grasslands in North America were compared with each other and with AM fungal communities in the Namib Desert in Africa using successive trap cultures to induce sporulation. Twenty-one AM fungal species were recovered, eight of which were undescribed. Species richness at each sampling site ranged from 6 to 12 species. There was considerable overlap in the species composition of the two desert regions surveyed in North America. Glomus microaggregatum Koske, Gemma & Olexia, Glomus etunicatum Becker & Gerd., Glomus intraradices Schenck & Smith, Glomus mosseae (Nicol. & Gerd.) Gerd. & Trappe, Glomus spurcum Pfeiffer, Walker & Bloss, and two undescribed Glomus species (AZ112 and AZ123) were detected in over 50% of the sampling sites in North America. Similarities in species composition of arid regions of Namibia and North America also was high, ranging from 54 to 79%. The taxonomic range of AM fungi was limited mostly to small-spored fungi in Glomaceae and Acaulosporaceae. Acaulospora trappei Ames & Linderman, Glomus etunicatum, Glomus intraradices, Glomus occultum Walker, Glomus microaggregatum, Glomus mosseae, Glomus spurcum, and an undescribed Glomus species (AZ123) were detected in all three desert regions and in semi-arid grasslands. Gigaspora rosea Nicolson & Schenck was the only species in Gigasporaceae detected, and then only at one sampling site in North America. Scutellospora species were not found. These results indicate involvement of both historical processes such as dispersal and selective variables at the local level in determining species composition in arid environments.Key words: biogeography, Chihuahuan Desert, community structure, diversity, Glomales, Namib Desert, species richness, Sonoran Desert.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".