Charting the Isophasic Endophyte of Dwarf Mistletoe Arceuthobium douglasii (Viscaceae) in Host Apical Buds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Dwarf mistletoes (Arceuthobium; Viscaceae) are highly specialized dioecious angiosperms parasitic on many gymnosperm hosts in the northern hemisphere. Several dwarf mistletoe species are capable of inducing an unusual form of isophasic infection in which the internal (endophytic) system proliferates even into the apical buds of its hosts. Studies of the internal endophytic system have, for the most part, focused on the parasite within secondary host tissues. The present anatomical and ultrastructural study characterizes the growth pattern of the isophasic endophytic system of Arceuthobium douglasii within the dormant apical buds of Pseudotsuga menziesii. METHODS: Semi-thin serial sections from dwarf mistletoe-infected host apical buds were mounted, stained and micrographed. Graphic files were created from the serial micrographs and these files were stacked. These stacked files were utilized to describe the pattern of growth of the endophyte within the host tissue. The interface between cells of the mistletoe and host was also examined at the ultrastructural level by transmission electron microscopy. KEY RESULTS: By utilizing a novel technique of superimposed graphics, the current study reveals an organized pattern of mistletoe distribution that penetrates further into host tissues than previously known. A consistent pattern of growth occurring even into the preformed leaves of the host is documented. CONCLUSIONS: The apparently non-intrusive growth of the parasite appears to be developmentally synchronized with that of the host. No symplastic connections were observed in the ultrastructural examination of the parasite/host interface within the apical buds of Pseudotsuga menziesii parasitized by A. douglasii or of Pinus contorta parasitized by A. americanum.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".