MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282945743 · doi:10.1093/femsre/fuac026

Local adaptation in fungi

2022· review· en· W4282945743 on OpenAlexafffund
Anna Bazzicalupo

Bibliographic record

VenueFEMS Microbiology Reviews · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyAdaptation (eye)Local adaptationContext (archaeology)MultinucleateEvolutionary biologyHost adaptationFilamentous fungusEcologyVirulenceGeneticsGeneBotanyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this review, I explore the pervasive but underappreciated role of local adaptation in fungi. It has been difficult historically to study local adaptation in fungi because of the limited understanding of fungal species and their traits, but new hope has been offered with technological advances in sequencing. The filamentous nature of fungi invalidates some assumptions made in evolution because of their ability to exist as multinucleate entities with genetically different nuclei sharing the same cytoplasm. Many insights on local adaptation have come from studying fungi, and much of the empirical evidence gathered about local adaptation in the context of host-pathogen interactions comes from studying fungal virulence genes, drug resistance, and environmental adaptation. Together, these insights paint a picture of the variety of processes involved in fungal local adaptation and their connections to the unusual cell biology of Fungi (multinucleate, filamentous habit), but there is much that remains unknown, with major gaps in our knowledge of fungal species, their phenotypes, and the ways by which they adapt to local conditions.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEMS Microbiology ReviewsSame topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFrench-language works237,207