<i>Armillaria</i> <i>sinapina</i> in herbaceous plant material from a peatland in Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Armillaria sinapina Bérubé & Dessureault mycelium was isolated once from living Carex aquatilis Wahlenb. rhizomes, twice from decomposing C. aquatilis leaves, and three times from decomposing Salix planifolia Pursh leaves in a southern boreal sedge-dominated fen in Alberta, Canada. Restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analyses of the IGS-1 region with the AluI restriction enzyme were used to identify the isolates, because conspicuous, epigeous basidiomes could not be found in or near the fen. During these analyses, two previously unpublished fragment patterns for A. sinapina were found, consisting of 399240135 base pairs (bp) and 399240183135 bp. Interspecific somatic incompatibility and interfertility tests confirmed the identifications obtained from the RFLP analyses. This is the first report of an annulate species of Armillaria being actively involved in the colonization and decomposition of herbaceous plant material in an ecosystem having only an organic soil horizon. Surveys for species of Armillaria should be expanded to include peatlands and herbaceous plant materials, because they may serve as vast potential biomass and genetic diversity reservoirs for this genus.Key words: peatland, Carex rhizomes, Salix leaves, RFLP, interspecific somatic incompatibility, interfertility.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".