Distance from the Forest Edge Influences Soil Fungal Communities Colonizing a Reclaimed Soil Borrow Site in Boreal Mixedwood Forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil fungi are important components of boreal forest ecosystems; for example, saprotrophic fungi regulate nutrient cycling, and mycorrhizal species facilitate nutrient uptake by plants. This study aimed to assess soil fungal communities in a reclaimed area and an adjacent natural mixedwood forest and to identify the distribution of taxa available for seedling colonization. Soil fungal microbiomes were assessed along three transects (from 10 m inside the interior of the undisturbed forest to 40 m inside the reclaimed area) and in the roots of small aspen within the natural forest. Using high-throughput deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) sequencing of internal transcribed spacer amplicons, a total of 2796 unique fungal taxa were detected across fine roots, forest floor, and mineral soils collected along the transects, whereas 166 taxa were detected in the aspen roots from the natural forest. Within the interior of the forest, ectomycorrhizal fungi were more common, whereas in the reclaimed areas, arbuscular mycorrhizae and saprophytes were more common. This survey showed that natural areas of adjacent undisturbed forest can act as a source of ectomycorrhizal fungi for dispersal into reclaimed areas. Notably, soil fungal taxa colonizing the root systems of small aspen included species that are specifically associated with soils from the undisturbed forest (primarily ectomycorrhizae) or the reclaimed clearing (saprotrophs and plant pathogens).
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".