Endophytic fungal symbionts associated with gypsophilous plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gypsum soils (calcium sulfate) occur throughout arid regions of the world. These soils contain a large number of endemic plants. Limited information is available about the microbial symbionts of these plants. We collected eight endemic gypsophilous flowering plant species in New Mexico and characterized their root- and leaf-associated fungi using molecular, microscopic, and culture techniques. Dominant culturable fungi were identified by analysis of the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) rDNA region. Microscopic analysis of roots indicated that gypsophilous plants are colonized primarily by arbuscular mycorrhizal and dark septate fungi. Sporobolus nealleyi Vasey (a gypsophilous grass) showed the greatest percentages of fungal colonization. All fungal isolates belonged to the Ascomycota, dominated by the orders Pleosporales and Sordariales. Isolates in the Alternaria complex were the dominant fungi recovered from leaves, and Monosporascus was the dominant genus recovered from roots. The dominant genera show low plant specificity and wide distribution as plant symbionts in arid regions. The generalist nature of gypsophilous plants with respect to their fungal symbionts could be advantageous for their successful establishment and survival. A common cohort of fungal symbionts could facilitate efficient transfer of nutrients and water in these plants that are restricted to a specific substrate in an environment dominated by extreme conditions.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".