Viability of <i>Neotyphodium</i> endophytic fungus and endophyte-infected and noninfected <i>Lolium multiflorum</i> seeds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neotyphodium endophyte fungi are vertically transmitted symbionts of cool-season grasses. The seed phase of the grass’ life cycle appears to be critical for the persistence of the fungus. Endophyte viability decreases faster than seed viability, but little is known of the effects of this endophyte on seed viability. The endophyte could affect seed viability through changes in water content. Here, we assessed the effects of the endophyte on seed viability, the differential survival of endophyte and seed, and the effects of infection on seed water content. Viability of endophyte-infected and noninfected seeds and endophyte were evaluated over a period of 729 d under 12 controlled environmental conditions. Seed viability was reduced by the infection at high temperature and high relative humidity, but not under other conditions. Moreover, endophyte viability decreased faster than seed viability only under high humidity or high temperature. Seed water content was not affected by endophyte presence. The proportion of viable infected seeds was mainly affected by the loss in endophyte viability and secondly by the differential survival of infected and noninfected seeds. Knowledge on the relative importance of these processes is critical to understand the factors affecting the efficiency of endophyte vertical transmission and the frequency of endophyte-infected plants.
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".