MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2300636940 · doi:10.1080/21501203.2015.1043968

Diversity, population genetics, and evolution of macrofungi associated with animals

2015· review· en· W2300636940 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaozhao Tang, Fei Mi, Ying Zhang, Xiaoxia He, Yang Cao, Pengfei Wang, Chunli Liu, Dan Yang, Jianyong Dong, Keqing Zhang, Jianping Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueMycology&#58 An International Journal on Fungal Biology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyEvolutionary biologyDiversity (politics)Population geneticsGenetic diversityGeneticsPopulationEcologyDemographyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Macrofungi refers to all fungi that produce visible fruiting bodies. These fungi are evolutionarily and ecologically very divergent. Evolutionarily, they belong to two main phyla, Ascomycota and Basidiomycota, and many of them have relatives that cannot form visible fruiting bodies. Ecologically, macrofungi can be associated with dead organic matter, plants, and animals. Here we review our current understanding of population structure and biogeography of macrofungi associated with animals. Their interactions, functions, and patterns of coevolution are described and discussed. Our focus is on studies using molecular markers. Our analyses suggest that the types of fungi-animal associations play an important role in the structure of these animal-associated fungal populations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations24
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMycology&#58 An International Journal on Fungal BiologySame topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFrench-language works237,207