Diversity, biocontrol, and growth promotion potential of culturable endophytic fungi isolated from root, shoot, and leaf of wild <i>Phoebe bournei</i> Yang across seasons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Endophytic fungi were isolated from Phoebe bournei (Hemsl.) Yang, and their diversity and antimicrobial and plant-growth-promoting activities were investigated. Of the 389 isolated endophytic fungi, 88.90% belonged to phylum Ascomycota and 11.10% to phylum Basidiomycota. The isolates were grouped into four taxonomic classes, 11 orders, 30 genera, and 45 species based on internal transcribed spacer sequencing and morphologic analysis. The host showed a strong affinity for the genera Diaporthe and Phyllosticta. The diversity of the fungi was highest in autumn, followed by spring and summer, and was lowest in winter. The fungi exhibited notable tissue specificity in P. bournei, and the species richness and diversity were highest in the root across all seasons. Five isolates showed antimicrobial activity against eight plant pathogens and reduced the incidence of leaf spot disease in P. bournei. Additionally, nine biocontrol isolates showed plant-growth-promoting activity, with five significantly promoting P. bournei seedling growth. This is the first report on the endophytic fungi of P. bournei and their potential applicability to plant disease control and growth promotion.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".