Dating the emergence of truffle-like fungi in Australia, by using an augmented meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Australia supports a high diversity of sequestrate (truffle-like) macrofungi. This has long been thought to be related to the predominantly or seasonally dry climate. The present study posits that if aridity were a key factor in the evolution of sequestrate fruit-bodies, most sequestrate species would have emerged in Australia only after it began to aridify, which occurred post-separation with Antarctica (c. 32 million years ago). Focusing on the high phylogenetic diversity of sequestrate taxa in the Agaricomycetes in Australia, dates of sequestrate nodes were compiled directly from published phylogenies (four lineages) or created using sequences available on GenBank that were processed in BEAST using a secondary calibration method (nine lineages). Although the morphologically diverse Hysterangiales was found to be the first group to become sequestrate, c. 83 million years ago, overall sequestration in Australia occurred more recently. Models were created and compared and support was found for an increased rate of sequestration in Australia at some point between 34 and 13 million years ago (during the Oligocene and Miocene). Although the rate of sequestration is shown to have increased in Australia after separation from Antarctica, the timing also overlaps with the radiation of potential mycorrhizal plant associates, and the emergence of specialised mycophagous marsupials. Although aridification is evidently not the sole driver of sequestration, it is still likely to have had a major influence on the diversity of sequestrate fungi in Australia. Comparisons with other regions of high sequestrate diversity will be informative.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".