MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2527276262 · doi:10.1086/688675

Mutualism Persistence and Abandonment during the Evolution of the Mycorrhizal Symbiosis

2016· article· en· W2527276262 on OpenAlexaff
Hafiz Maherali, Brad Oberle, Peter F. Stevens, William K. Cornwell, Daniel J. McGlinn

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Naturalist · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNational Evolutionary Synthesis Center
KeywordsMutualism (biology)SymbiosisBiologyCoevolutionNatural selectionEcologyEvolutionary biologyBacteriaSelection (genetic algorithm)Genetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mutualistic symbioses with mycorrhizal fungi are widespread in plants. The majority of plant species associate with arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi. By contrast, the minority associate with ectomycorrhizal (EM) fungi, have abandoned the symbiosis and are nonmycorrhizal (NM), or engage in an intermediate, weakly AM symbiosis (AMNM). To understand the processes that maintain the mycorrhizal symbiosis or cause its loss, we reconstructed its evolution using a ∼3,000-species seed plant phylogeny integrated with mycorrhizal state information. Reconstruction indicated that the common ancestor of seed plants most likely associated with AM fungi and that the EM, NM, and AMNM states descended from the AM state. Direct transitions from the AM state to the EM and NM states were infrequent and generally irreversible, implying that natural selection or genetic constraint could promote stasis once a particular state evolved. However, the evolution of the NM state was more frequent via an indirect pathway through the AMNM state, suggesting that weakening of the AM symbiosis is a necessary precursor to mutualism abandonment. Nevertheless, reversions from the AMNM state back to the AM state were an order of magnitude more likely than transitions to the NM state, suggesting that natural selection favors the AM symbiosis over mutualism abandonment.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations123
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American NaturalistSame topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFrench-language works237,207