Characteristics of the rhizobia associated with <i>Dalea</i> spp. in the Ordway, Kellogg–Weaver Dunes, and Hayden prairies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Habitat fragmentation affects the biodiversity and function of aboveground organisms in natural ecosystems but has not been studied for effects on belowground species. In this paper, we consider the diversity of the rhizobia associated with the indigenous legume Dalea purpurea in 3 residual prairie areas in Minnesota and Iowa. Using Dalea purpurea as a trap host, 218 rhizobia were recovered from these soils then characterized using BOXA1R PCR. Three major and 13 minor groups were distinguished based on a similarity of greater than 75% in fingerprint patterns. Each major group consisted almost exclusively of rhizobia from a single prairie, with the diversity of Dalea rhizobia recovered from the Hayden Prairie less than that obtained with rhizobia from the other prairies. Based on 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis, isolates from the Hayden, Ordway, and Kellogg-Weaver Dunes prairies were most similar to Rhizobium etli and Rhizobium leguminosarum, Rhizobium gallicum, and Mesorhizobium amorphae and Mesorhizobium huakuii, respectively. This variation in the dominant microsymbiont species across the 3 prairies studied was unexpected but could have been influenced by the limited number of samples that we were allowed to take, by unanticipated cross-nodulation between native legumes, and by variation in the range of legume species present in each residual prairie area. While some of the rhizobia from Dalea nodulated Phaseolus vulgaris, Macroptilium atropurpureum, Leucaena leucocephala, and Onobrychis viciifolia in addition to the Dalea species tested, others nodulated Astragalus canadensis or Amorpha canescens.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".