Planktonic Marine Fungi: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Fungi in marine ecosystems play crucial roles as saprotrophs, parasites, and pathogens. The definition of marine fungi has evolved over the past century. Currently, “marine fungi” are defined as any fungi recovered repeatedly from marine habitats that are able to grow and/or sporulate in marine environments, form symbiotic relationships with other marine organisms, adapt and evolve at the genetic level, or are active metabolically in marine environments. While there are a number of recent reviews synthesizing our knowledge derived from over a century of research on marine fungi, this review article focuses on the state of knowledge on planktonic marine fungi from the coastal and open ocean, defined as fungi that are in suspension or attached to particles, substrates or in association with hosts in the pelagic zone of the ocean, and their roles in remineralization of organic matter and major biogeochemical cycles. This review differs from previous ones by focusing on biogeochemical impacts of planktonic marine fungi and methodological considerations for investigating their diversity and ecological functions. Importantly, we point out gaps in our knowledge and the potential methodological biases that might have contributed to these gaps. Finally, we highlight recommendations that will facilitate future studies of marine fungi. This article first provides a brief overview of the diversity of planktonic marine fungi, followed by a discussion of the biogeochemical impacts of planktonic marine fungi, and a wide range of methods that can be used to study marine fungi.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".