MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361852938 · doi:10.47371/mycosci.myc50165

Constant association of ophiostomatoid fungi with the bark beetle <i>Ips subelongatus</i> invading Japanese larch logs

2009· article· en· W4361852938 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yuichi Yamaoka, Wen‐Hsin Chung, Hayato Masuya, Mizuki Hizai

Bibliographic record

VenueMycoscience · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TsukubaFPInnovationsIowa State University
KeywordsBiologyBark beetleBotanyLarchBark (sound)Ecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ceratocystiopsis, Ceratocystis, Grosmannia, and Ophiostoma species were isolated from Ips subelongatus and beetle-infested Japanese larch logs collected at several areas in central and northern Honshu Island, Japan, to determine constant associates of I. subelongatus. Ceratocystiopsis minuta, two species of Ceratocystis, three species of Grosmannia, and four species of Ophiostoma were isolated. Of the fungi isolated in the present study, G. laricis, O. brunneociliatum, and O. piceae were constant associates of the beetles. Ceratocystis fujiensis, Ceratocystiopsis minuta, and Ophiostoma sp. F were occasionally isolated with high frequencies of occurrence but were not consistent associates. Ceratocystis fujiensis was most often isolated as the leading fungal invasion in the sapwood of Japanese larch logs invaded by I. subelongatus, confirming that the fungus acts as a primary invader of sapwood in beetle-attacked logs.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMycoscienceSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207