Plant and fungal identity determines pathogen protection of plant roots by arbuscular mycorrhizas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary 1. A major benefit of the mycorrhizal symbiosis is that it can protect plants from below‐ground enemies, such as pathogens. Previous studies have indicated that plant identity (particularly plants that differ in root system architecture) or fungal identity (fungi from different families within the Glomeromycota) can determine the degree of protection from infection by pathogens. Here, we test the combined effects of plant and fungal identity to assess if there is a strong interaction between these two factors. 2. We paired one of two plants (Setaria glauca, a plant with a finely branched root system and Allium cepa, which has a simple root system) with one of six different fungal species from two families within the Glomeromycota. We assessed the degree to which plant identity, fungal identity and their interaction determined infection by Fusarium oxysporum, a common plant pathogen. 3. Our results show that the interaction between plant and fungal identity can be an important determinant of root infection by the pathogen. Infection by Fusarium was less severe in Allium (simple root system) or when Setaria (complex root system) was associated with a fungus from the family Glomeraceae. We also detected significant plant growth responses to the treatments; the fine‐rooted Setaria benefited more from associating with a member of the family Glomeraceae, while Allium benefited more from associating with a member of the family Gigasporaceae. 4. Synthesis. This study supports previous claims that plants with complex root systems are more susceptible to infection by pathogens, and that the arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis can reduce infection in such plants – provided that the plant is colonized by a mycorrhizal fungus that can offer protection, such as the isolates of Glomus used here.
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) | 0.001 | 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".