MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990948767 · doi:10.3390/d11120222

No Change Detected in Culturable Fungal Assemblages on Cave Walls in Eastern Canada with the Introduction of Pseudogymnoascus destructans

2019· article· en· W2990948767 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Karen J. Vanderwolf, David Malloch, Donald F. McAlpine

Bibliographic record

VenueDiversity · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Wildlife Federation
FundersCanadian Wildlife FederationParks Canada
KeywordsCaveBiologyEcologyPopulationOutbreakZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies of fungi in caves have become increasingly important with the advent of white-nose syndrome (WNS), a disease caused by the invasive fungus Pseudogymnoascus destructans (Pd) that has killed an estimated 6.5 million North American bats. We swabbed cave walls in New Brunswick, Canada, in 2012 and 2015 to determine whether the culturable fungal assemblage on cave walls changed after the introduction of Pd and subsequent decrease in hibernating bat populations. We also compared fungal assemblages on cave walls to previous studies on the fungal assemblages of arthropods and hibernating bats in the same sites. The fungal diversity of bats and cave walls was more similar than on arthropods. The diversity and composition of fungal assemblages on cave walls was significantly different among media types and sites but did not differ over time. Therefore, no change in the culturable fungal assemblage present on cave walls was detected with the introduction of Pd and subsequent disappearance of the hibernating bat population over a 3-year period. This suggests that fungi documented in caves in the region prior to the outbreak of Pd do not require regular transmission of spores by bats to maintain fungal diversity at these sites.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.154 · 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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiversitySame topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207