Leptographium piriforme sp. nov., from a taxonomically diverse collection of arthropods collected in an aspen-dominated forest in western Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During a survey of fungi associated with arthropods collected in a southern boreal mixed-wood forest in Alberta we obtained 29 isolates of a unique species of Leptographium. This species displayed a distinct combination of characteristics, including curved conidia on short-stipitate conidiophores, a secondary micronematous conidial state, stalked pear-shaped cells and an optimal growth rate at 35 C, and is described as Leptographium piriforme sp. nov. The isolates were most similar morphologically to L. crassivaginatum, but ITS sequence comparisons indicate that our isolates cannot be assigned to this or any other sequenced species in the genus. Initial observations on the pear-shaped cells in feeding experiments with Sancassania berlesei show that these structures may act as a nutritional incentive for visiting arthropods. Most arthropods carrying this new species were caught in traps baited with dung which, in light of its optimum growth temperature, suggests a coprophilous phase in the life cycle of this species. Additional isolates from woody species typical of the survey area might clarify whether Leptographium piriforme in its forest habitat occurs as a plant pathogen or saprobe.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".