Xerophilic Aspergillaceae Dominate the Communities of Culturable Fungi in the Mound Nests of the Western Thatching Ant (Formica obscuripes)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nests of mound-building ants are unexplored reservoirs of fungal diversity. A previous assessment of this diversity in the nests of Formica ulkei suggested that water availability may be a determinant of the composition of this mycota. To investigate this question, we recovered 3594 isolates of filamentous Ascomycota from the nests of Formica obscuripes and adjacent, non-nest sites, employing Dichloran Rose Bengal agar (DRBA), Dichloran Rose Bengal agar containing glycerol (DRBAG), and malt extract agar containing sucrose (MEA20S). Higher numbers of fungi were isolated from the tops of mounds than from within mounds and non-mound sites. Mound nest soils were dominated by members of the family Aspergillaceae, and up to 50% of the colonies isolated on DRBAG belonged to the genus Aspergillus. Pseudogymnoascus pannorum and species of Talaromyces were also present in higher numbers in mound soils. Species of Penicillium were more abundant in non-nest soils, where they accounted for over 66% of isolates on DRBA. All Aspergillaceae assessed for xerotolerance on a medium augmented with glycerol or sucrose were xerophilic. These results, and our observation that the nests of F. obscuripes are low-water environments, indicate that water availability influences the structure of the fungal communities in these animal-modified habitats.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".