The interface between the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus <i>Glomus intraradices</i> and root cells of <i>Panax quinquefolius</i>: a <i>Paris</i>-type mycorrhizal association
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two major types of arbucular mycorrhizal associations, the Arum-type and the Paris-type, have been identified based on morphological features. Although the Paris-type is the most common, it is the Arum-type that has been most intensively studied in terms of structure/function because of its prevalence in agronomically important plant species. In this study, the interface between the host cell cytoplasm and intracellular hyphae (extensive hyphal coils and arbusculate coils), which typify the Paris-type mycorrhiza, was studied. Using immunofluorescence techniques combined with laser scanning confocal microscopy, dramatic changes in the cytoskeleton in colonized cells were observed. Changes in the positioning of both host cell microtubules and actin filaments occurred in colonized plant cells. Both microtubules and actin filaments were associated with the hyphal coils and the arbusculate coils. An interfacial matrix, of host origin, was demonstrated between hyphal coils and arbusculate coils using various affinity techniques. It formed an apoplastic compartment consisting of cellulose and pectins between the fungus and host cell cytoplasm. There was less labelling adjacent to the fine branches of arbusculate coils compared to the hyphal coils. These observations show some similarities to those seen with Arum-type mycorrhizas.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".