Burkholderia and Cupriavidus spp. are the preferred symbionts of Mimosa spp. in Southern China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rhizobia were isolated from invasive Mimosa spp. (M. diplotricha and M. pudica) in Dehong district of the province of Yunnan in subtropical southern China. Almost all of the 98 isolates were β-rhizobia in the genera Burkholderia and Cupriavidus. These strains were analysed for their distribution characteristics together with strains from a previous study from Sishuangbanna. The proportion of nodules containing each β-rhizobial genus varied between Mimosa species, with Cupriavidus being predominant in M. diplotricha nodules (63.3% compared to 36.7% occupation with Burkholderia), but with M. pudica showing a slight preference for Burkholderia over Cupriavidus, with them occupying 56.5% and 43.5% of nodules, respectively. The symbiosis-essential genes nodA and nifH were present in all the Burkholderia and Cupriavidus strains tested, and their phylogenies indicated that these Mimosa symbionts share symbiotic genes with native South American rhizobia. The evolutionary discrepancies among 16S rRNA genes, nodA and nifH of Mimosa spp. symbionts, suggests that the nod and nif genes of β-rhizobia evolved independently.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".