MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030241958 · doi:10.1021/jf803173x

Root Colonization by an Arbuscular Mycorrhizal (AM) Fungus Increases Growth and Secondary Metabolism of Purple Coneflower, Echinacea purpurea (L.) Moench

2009· article· en· W2030241958 on OpenAlexaff
Ghada Araim, Ammar Saleem, John T. Arnason, Christiane Charest

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFungal Biology and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonizationEchinacea (animal)BiologySecondary metabolismFungusSymbiosisArbuscular mycorrhizaInoculationMycorrhizaShootBotanyGlomeromycotaBacteriaHorticultureBiosynthesisMicrobiologyEcologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purple coneflower, Echinacea purpurea (L.) Moench, is an important phytomedicinal species that contains phenolics and alkamides with antipathogenic properties. This study aimed to examine the effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) colonization on the physiology and biochemistry of E. purpurea. It was hypothesized that AM colonization enhances the growth and secondary metabolism in E. purpurea. In this regard, a 13-week factorial greenhouse experiment was performed with E. purpurea, inoculated (or not) with the AM fungus Glomus intraradices Schenck & Smith. Overall, the results indicated that AM colonization significantly increased the mass of shoots and roots and the concentrations of proteins and most of the phenolics in the roots. Hence, the selected trait of mycorrhiza could play an important role in optimizing the growth of E. purpurea by inducing the production of secondary phytomedicinal metabolites.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations96
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistrySame topicFungal Biology and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207