Arbuscular mycorrhizae on Axel Heiberg Island (80°N) and at Saskatoon (52°N) Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arbuscular mycorrhizae (AM) are seldom reported from high latitudes. We found that Asteraceae ( Arnica , Erigeron , and Taraxacum ) at a site on Axel Heiberg Island (approximately 80°N) have abundant AM and fine endophytes (FE). We used standard microscopic methods for examination and quantification, plus high-resolution confocal fluorescence imaging. AM in Arctic Asteraceae were compared with those in congeners from Saskatoon and with those in some other Arctic species. Arctic AM had 6 µm wide aseptate hyphae producing abundant arbuscules, vesicles, and inter- and intra-cellular hyphae. AM colonization exceeded 80% for Arctic Asteraceae, similar to 66%–90% for prairie Taraxacum and Erigeron, the first of this type of comparison. AM/FE abundance in Arctic Ranunculus was 68%. Within Taraxacum roots, hyphal coils predominated near the epidermis and arbuscules near the vascular cylinder. Arctic AM colonization did not vary with soil depth, although permafrost was approximately 15 cm below the surface. FE were abundant in our High Arctic samples, where they may have functional roles comparable with those of AM. Thus, low abundance of AM reported previously at the community level for high-latitude sites may reflect a combination of biotic and abiotic factors. The Axel Heiberg Island thermal oasis is ideal for functional fungal root endophyte studies in the High Arctic.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".