Detection of forest stand-level spatial structure in ectomycorrhizal fungal communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ectomycorrhizal fungal (EMF) communities are highly diverse at the stand level. To begin to understand what might lead to such diversity, and to improve sampling designs, we investigated the spatial structure of these communities. We used EMF community data from a number of studies carried out in seven mature and one recently fire-initiated forest stand. We applied various measures of spatial pattern to characterize distributions at EMF community and species levels: Mantel tests, Mantel correlograms, variance/mean and standardized variograms. Mantel tests indicated that in four of eight sites community similarity decreased with distance, whereas Mantel correlograms also found spatial autocorrelation in those four plus two additional sites. In all but one of these sites elevated similarity was evident only at relatively small spatial scales (< 2.6 m), whereas one exhibited a larger scale pattern ( approximately 25 m). Evenness of biomass distribution among cores varied widely among taxa. Standardized variograms indicated that most of the dominant taxa showed patchiness at a scale of less than 3 m, with a range from 0 to < or =17 m. These results have implications for both sampling scale and intensity to achieve maximum efficiency of community sampling. In the systems we examined, cores should be at least 3 m apart to achieve the greatest sampling efficiency for stand-level community analysis. In some cases even this spacing may result in reduced sampling efficiency arising from patterns of spatial autocorrelation. Interpretation of the causes and significance of these patterns requires information on the genetic identity of individuals in the communities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".