Understory conifer seedling response to a gradient of root and ectomycorrhizal fungal contact
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The possible benefit of common mycorrhizal network linkages to seedling growth was tested in a low light partial-cut forest understory. Naturally regenerated western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla Raf.) and hybrid spruce (Picea glauca × Picea sitchensis [Moench] Voss) seedlings were transplanted directly into soil or within bags of different pore sizes to restrict the amounts of root and ectomycorrhizal contact. The 5-year study included "full contact" (no bag), "moderate contact" (250-µm openings), and "low contact" (4-µm openings) treatments. Height increment was lowest for full contact seedlings over most of the experiment, and highest for low contact seedlings by years 4 and 5. Full contact seedlings also had slightly lower foliar N content than moderate and low contact seedlings. There were no significant interactions in growth detected between tree species and treatments, despite the higher potential for common mycorrhizal network linkages between a western hemlock understory and canopy. Fifty-eight ectomycorrhizal fungal morphotypes were identified on the seedlings, including many with smooth mantles or with only sparse emanating hyphae, which likely reduced the potential for common mycorrhizal network linkages. These results would support the more traditional concepts of competition for scarce resources by isolated seedlings as the primary interaction for the understory of these mature forests.Key words: common mycorrhizal networks, facilitation, shade tolerance, competition.
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".