Stimulating growth and xylindein production of Chlorociboria aeruginascens in agar-based systems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four isolates of Chlorociboria aeruginascens were tested for possible stimulatory effects when grown on malt agar media containing wood additives. The addition of any of the four types of test wood (Acer saccharum, Populus tremuloides, spalted P. tremuloides, and Ailanthus altissima), stimulated colony growth and xylindein production in C. aeruginascens. Addition of any amount of wood produced more growth than no wood additions, while ground wood produced more growth than chopped wood. Of the wood types tested, A. saccharum wood stimulated all four isolates, while spalted Populus tremuloides stimulated three of the four isolates. High glucose and sucrose amounts may be partially responsible for the greater stimulatory affect of some woods over others. The development of this simple and reliable method for growth and pigment stimulation of C. aeruginascens in laboratory conditions will allow for further development of this fungus for decorative and commercial use.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 it