Fungal endophytes of wild and hybrid <i>Vitis</i> leaves and their potential for vineyard biocontrol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plants are colonized by diverse assemblages of fungal endophytes that have potential as biocontrol agents for a variety of crops, including grapevine. Although the diversity of symbionts can be very high in wild plants, the fungal endophytes of wild Vitis plants have not yet been investigated. We surveyed the fungal endophytes of 6 wild populations of Vitis riparia, as well as a cold-tolerant, hybrid grapevine in 5 vineyards (1 certified organic), using 454 pyrosequencing. We detected between 43 and 235 operational taxonomic units per sample, with the highest richness and diversity in the wild, the lowest in conventional vineyards, and intermediate levels in the organic vineyard. Wild plants supported a range of taxa not seen in the conventional vineyards, and vineyards were dominated by relatively few taxa. We also isolated fungi from the wild plants and tested them for their ability to inhibit pathogens of grapevine. Several wild isolates (e.g., Ramularia spp.) were strongly inhibitory to grapevine pathogens. We show that wild Vitis supports a distinct and highly diverse community of fungal endophytes and may represent a rich repository of potential vineyard biocontrol agents.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".