Competition between foliar Neotyphodium lolii endophytes and mycorrhizal Glomus spp. fungi in Lolium perenne depends on resource supply and host carbohydrate content
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Cool-season grasses can be simultaneously infected by foliar fungal endophytes and colonised by mycorrhizal fungi, the integrated functions of which are strong predictors of plant fitness within grassland ecosystems. Evidence has been presented previously that infection of grass species with foliar endophytes can negatively affect mycorrhizal colonisation. Here, we tested the hypothesis that mycorrhizal colonisation in turn adversely affects Neotyphodium endophyte concentrations and that the competitive interaction between the two endosymbionts is affected by resource supply. 2. Specifically, we report how competition between Glomus (G. mosseae– GM, G. intraradices– GI) mycorrhizal fungi and N. lolii (common strain (CS) and AR1) foliar endophytic strains is affected by P supply and water-soluble carbohydrate (WSC) content in two Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass) cultivars: a high sugar grass, AberDart, and a conventional (control) grass, Fennema. 3. The presence of Glomus mycorrhizae reduced the concentrations of endophytes and alkaloids in leaf blades and pseudostems. The reduction depended on P supply, ryegrass cultivar (notably WSC content) and endophyte strain. Conversely, foliar endophyte infection reduced mycorrhizal colonisation rates and concentrations in the roots of the control cultivar Fennema, although not in the high sugar cultivar, AberDart. 4. Neither GM nor N. lolii infection had an effect per se on the yield of root or blade compared with mycorrhiza-free (M-) and endophyte-free (E-) plants, respectively; though, yield of roots and blades was reduced by GI infection and at low P. 5. Competitive interactions between ecologically widespread foliar endophytes (valuable for plant protection) and mycorrhizal endosymbionts (valuable for P acquisition) as seen in this study are of critical importance especially in areas of high pest prevalence and low P availability. Our work stresses the need for elucidating the physiological/metabolic basis for such interactions between endosymbionts to understand how these processes contribute to plant performance and fitness in grassland ecosystems.
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".