Lesion formation and host response to infection by <i>Armillaria ostoyae</i> in the roots of western larch and Douglas‐fir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The process of lesion formation and host response to natural infection by Armillaria ostoyae were studied in the roots of western larch (Larix occidentalis) and Douglas‐fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii ssp. glauca) trees in the three age classes, 6–8, 18–19 and 85–95 years. The characteristics of lesions on infected roots were recorded and bark samples were dissected from infection points and lesion margins in the field and stored in liquid nitrogen for macroscopic study in the laboratory. Infection in the roots of 6‐ to 8‐year‐old trees advanced freely, overcoming any host resistance, quickly girdling the root collar and killing the trees. In 18‐ and 19‐year‐old trees, however, 43% of infections on western larch and 27% of the infections on Douglas‐fir roots were confined to lesions bounded by necrophylactic periderms with multiple bands of phellem. Host response was similar in 85‐ to 95‐year‐old trees, but the percentage of confined lesions was higher than in younger trees. The results suggest that larch shows resistance to A. ostoyae at a younger age and with greater frequency than Douglas‐fir.
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) | 0.000 | 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".