Mycorrhizal inoculum and performance of nonmycorrhizal <i>Carex bigelowii </i>and mycorrhizal <i>Trientalis europaea</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied the competition between mycorrhiza-forming Trientalis europaea L. and nonmycorrhizal Carex bigelowii Torrey ex Schweinitz in a climate chamber experiment. The plants were grown either singly or together with a conspecific or heterospecific individual, with arbuscular mycorrhizal inoculum present or absent. Inoculated T. euro paea formed abundant arbuscular mycorrhizal structures, but the mycorrhizae did not affect its biomass or the whole plant's relative growth rate (RGR). Carex bigelowii did not form mycorrhizae, but its shoot biomass and RGR were lower in the inoculated pots. The presence of a conspecific or heterospecific plant had no effect on the shoot biomasses or RGR of either plant species. Mycorrhizal inoculation increased the root/shoot ratio of C. bigelowii in all competition treatments. The presence of C. bigelowii decreased the root/shoot ratio of T. europaea in both mycorrhizal and nonmy corrhizal state. Mycorrhizal inoculum thus had a direct negative effect on the growth of a nonmycorrhizal plant. The result suggests that although mycorrhizae may not always directly affect the performance of the host plant, they may possibly increase the host plant performance in relation to nonmycorrhizal neighbours. Mycorrhizal inoculum and mycorrhizal symbiosis may increase asymmetry of interspecific competition, which may facilitate the coexistence of plant species in cases when a larger individual is more negatively affected.Key words: arbuscular mycorrhiza, competitive asymmetry, micropropagation.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".