Bibliographic record
Abstract
The endosphere of ginseng contains a variety of fungal, bacterial, archaeal and viral endophytes. Bacterial endophytes are primarily members of the Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes, and fungal endophytes are primarily members of the Ascomycota, Zygomycota and Basidiomycota. Although archaea and viruses have been detected in symptomless ginseng plants, little is known about them. Many but not all studies have shown roots having the highest abundance and diversity of bacterial and fungal endophytes, with some endophytes showing specificity to above or belowground tissues. Abundance often increases with root age, although diversity can decrease, possibly related to increases in potential latent fungal pathogen infections. The descriptions of many endophytes that can metabolize ginsenosides indicate an adaptation of the microbes to the unique combination of secondary metabolites found in ginseng tissues. Most research on the benefits provided by bacterial and fungal endophytes has concentrated on improved plant nutrition, growth promotion and increased disease resistance, but little on their ability to increase abiotic stress resistance. Some other areas where more research is needed is field trials with endophyte-treated plants grown in various environments, genomic/metagenomic analysis of endophytes, and the effects of endophytes on induced disease resistance and abiotic stress tolerance.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".