MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944422658 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0221037

Mycorrhizal response in crop versus wild plants

2019· article· en· W2944422658 on OpenAlexaff
Vasilis Kokkoris, Chantal Hamel, Miranda M. Hart

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyCropSymbiosisFungusInoculationBiomass (ecology)Host (biology)Arbuscular mycorrhizalBotanyMycorrhizal fungiArbuscular mycorrhizal fungiHorticultureAgronomyEcologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We proposed a theoretical framework predicting mutualistic outcomes for the arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) symbiosis based on host provenance (crop versus wild). To test the framework, we grew two isolates of Rhizoglomus irregulare (commercial versus an isolate locally isolated), with five crop plants and five wild plants endemic to the region that co-occur with the locally sourced fungus. While inoculation with either isolate had no effect on plant biomass, it decreased leaf P content, particularly for wild plants. All plants associating with the commercial fungus had lower leaf P. Overall, our data shows that wild plants may be more sensitive to differences in mutualistic quality among fungal isolates.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 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

Citations27
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFrench-language works237,207