Fungal Endophytes: Discovering What Lies within Some of Canada’s Oldest and Most Resilient Grapevines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plant diseases and pests reduce crop yields, accounting for global crop losses of 30% to 50%. In conventional agricultural production systems, these losses are typically controlled by applying chemical pesticides. However, public pressure is mounting to curtail agrochemical use. In this context, employing beneficial endophytic microorganisms is an increasingly attractive alternative to the use of conventional chemical pesticides in agriculture. A multitude of fungal endophytes are naturally present in plants, producing enzymes, small peptides, and secondary metabolites due to their bioactivity, which can protect hosts from pathogens, pests, and abiotic stresses. The use of beneficial endophytic microorganisms in agriculture is an increasingly attractive alternative to conventional pesticides. The aim of this study was to characterize fungal endophytes isolated from apparently healthy, feral wine grapes in eastern Canada that have grown without agrochemical inputs for decades. Host plants ranged from unknown seedlings to long-lost cultivars not widely propagated since the 1800s. HPLC-MS was used to identify unique endophyte-derived chemical compounds in the host plants, while dual-culture competition assays showed a range in endophytes’ ability to suppress the mycelial growth of Botrytis, which is typically controlled in viticulture with pesticides. Twelve of the most promising fungal endophytes isolated were identified using multilocus sequencing and morphology, while DNA barcoding was employed to identify some of their host vines. These fungal endophyte isolates, which consisted of both known and putative novel strains, belonged to seven genera in six families and five orders of Ascomycota. Exploring the fungal endophytes in these specimens may yield clues to the vines’ survival and lead to the discovery of novel biocontrol agents.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".