Fungal colonization of aspen roots following mechanical site preparation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fungal colonization of aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) roots was examined in boreal mixedwood sites that were mechanically site prepared 810 years earlier for white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) regeneration using disc trenchers or ripper plows. A survey of root wounds determined that Armillaria sinapina Bérubé & Dessureault and Armillaria ostoyae (Romagn.) Herink were both wound pathogens of aspen; however, A. sinapina was more frequently associated with wounds than was A. ostoyae. Armillaria ostoyae was more common on unwounded root tissues. Sixty percent of wounds infected by A. sinapina were not compartmentalized and the likelihood of an A. sinapina infection did not increase with increasing wound size. Pathogenic fungi other than Armillaria were rarely associated with root wounds. Sever wounds were associated with furrows; scrape wounds were located both along and between furrows irrespective of the site-preparation technique (ripper plow vs. disk trencher).
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".