MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2623561549 · doi:10.1139/cjb-2017-0028

Quantifying inorganic nitrogen uptake capacity among ectomycorrhizal fungal species using MIFE microelectrode ion flux measurements: theory and applications

2017· article· en· W2623561549 on OpenAlexaffvenue
B. J. Hawkins, J. M. Kranabetter

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsMinistry of ForestsGovernment of British ColumbiaUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEctomycorrhizaeBiologyBotanyEctomycorrhizaEcosystemMycorrhizaForest ecologyEcologyPhototrophNitrogenPlant nutritionMicroelectrodeSymbiosisNutrientChemistryBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A growing appreciation of the intimate association between trees and a wide diversity of mycorrhizal fungi in forest ecosystems is leading to the view that trees and their associated mycorrhizal symbionts should be considered meta-organisms or holobionts. For ectomycorrhizal associations, nitrogen (N) mobilization and uptake is a major contribution from the fungal partners. This paper reviews the traditional methods of measuring N uptake by ectomycorrhizae, and describes the application of microelectrode ion flux measurement of nitrogen uptake using the MIFETM technique to ectomycorrhizal fungi associated with forest trees. From results obtained with microelectrode ion flux measurement thus far, we argue that plant N uptake capacity should be considered an exogenous trait, related to the functional diversity among ectomycorrhizal species and communities, rather than a function of host plant root physiology, alone.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFrench-language works237,207