Endophytic fungi in Canada wild rye in natural grasslands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some grasses harbor endophytic fungi living in intercellular spaces in the leaves, stems and reproductive organs. The fungi can dramatically affect the physiology and ecology of plants. For example, fungi may produce toxins that deter herbivores and they may alter the water status of the plant to increase drought tolerance. The distribution of fungal infection in natural plant populations is unknown for many host species. We investigated the occurrence of endophytic fungi in Elymus canadensis L. (Canada wild rye) from 13 remnant prairie sites in the midwest and 23 sites in the southern Great Plains. Collections of plant tissue came from Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Illinois, Oklahoma, and Texas. All midwest plants were grown in a common garden site in eastern Nebraska. Seeds collected from Oklahoma and Texas accessions were planted in the greenhouse. At least 3 tillers from 2 plants of each accession were screened for endophytes, using light microscopy. The endophytic fungus was found in seed of all accessions and in plants from all but 4 accessions. The functional significance of the fungus is unclear, but it may affect plants by enhancing productivity or deterring herbivores. The widespread occurrence of endophytic fungi in natural populations of E. canadensis suggests that the plant-fungal association may be long-standing and important in the evolution and success of this native prairie species.
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 | 0.000 | 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".