High diversity of fungi associated with living parts of boreal forest bryophytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bryophytes are a dominant and functionally important component of the forest floor vegetation in boreal forests, yet little is known about the fungal diversity associated with these abundant plants. Using molecular identification, we document an ecologically and phylogenetically diverse array of fungi associated with the living parts of three widespread and abundant boreal forest bryophytes, i.e., Hylocomium splendens (Hedw.) Schimp. in B.S.G., Pleurozium schreberi (Brid.) Mitt., and Polytrichum commune Hedw. From 376 cloned ITS sequences, 158 operational taxonomic units (OTUs), roughly corresponding to the number of species, were defined based on sequence similarity searches (Fasta) and phylogenetic analyses. A main portion (62.8%) of the OTUs belonged to Ascomycota, 32.0% to Basidiomycota, 3.9% to Chytridiomycota, and 1.3% to Glomeromycota. The most common orders were Helotiales (18.6%), Agaricales (11.5%), Chaetothyriales (9.6%), and Tremellales (9.0%). Frequently detected OTUs of potentially high ecologic importance included two with high sequence similarity (>99%) to the agaric Entoloma conferendum (Britzelm.) Noordel and the endophyte Lophodermium piceae (Fckl.) Hoehn., and various OTUs with affinity to the Helotian genus Hyphodiscus. Several ectomycorrhiza-forming basidiomycetes were also detected. Most OTUs (77.2%) were only detected once and a very small overlap in composition of OTUs was observed among the three bryophytes, indicating the occurrence of an immense fungal diversity associated with boreal forest bryophytes that deserves further study.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".