MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149533704 · doi:10.1139/x08-101

Fungi associated with <i>Tomicus minor</i> on <i>Pinus sylvestris</i> in Poland and their succession into the sapwood of beetle-infested windblown trees

2008· article· en· W2149533704 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Robert Jankowiak

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsOphiostomaBiologyEcological successionBotanyBark beetleCurculionidaePinus <genus>Scots pineHorticultureFungus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study identified and measured frequency of fungal species associated with Tomicus minor (Hart.) on Pinus sylvestris L. (Scots pine) in Poland. Additionally, fungal succession in P. sylvestris sapwood was investigated during a 12 week period following an attack by this insect. Fungi were isolated from five populations of overwintered adult beetles and their galleries with 59 species of fungi being represented among the 2880 cultures obtained. The most frequent species, Ophiostoma canum (Münch) Syd. &amp; P. Syd., Hormonema dematioides Lagerb. &amp; Melin, and Ambrosiella tingens (Lagerb. &amp; Melin) L.R. Batra, appeared to be specifically associated with T. minor. The succesional changes in species composition during a 12 week period following an attack by T. minor were observed. The pattern of fungal succession in P. sylvestris sapwood essentially agreed with a general scheme of fungal succession in tree sapwood infested by bark beetles. Ambrosiella tingens was the first invader of sapwood and occurred most frequently in its deeper layers. Ophiostoma canum, H. dematioides, and other molds were also often isolated from the sapwood; however, they were most common at a depth of 5 mm during the initial phase of fungal colonization. Later, Ophiostoma canum followed A. tingens in the sapwood invasion.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score0.974

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207