Additional file 1 of Microbiota and functional analyses of nitrogen-fixing bacteria in root-knot nematode parasitism of plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Additional file 1: Table S1. Experimental design and basic sequencing statistics for samples collected from five plant species. Table S3. Experimental design and basic sequencing statistics for samples collected from tomato plants at different growth stages. Table S9. Experimental design and basic traits for samples collected from tomato plants amended with different nitrogen sources. Table S11. Experimental design and basic sequencing statistics from metaproteomic analyses. Figure S1. Order-level community comparison and OTU-based hierarchical clustering analysis of healthy and nematode parasitized samples in five plant species. Figure S2. Unconstrained PCoA (for principal coordinates PCo1 and PCo2) with Bray–Curtis distance showing the root-associated bacteria of healthy and parasitized samples, for each plant species. Figure S3. The composition and relative abundance of major bacterial orders of the tomato root-associated microbiota at different developmental stages. Figure S4. Pairwise analysis for the variation of root-associated microbiota over time at different growth and RKN parasitism stages in tomato. Figure S5. The shared OTUs number and taxonomic composition of the depleted and enriched OUTs in the parasitized root samples (IRH and IRK) comparing with healthy roots (HRC).
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 | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.820 | 0.179 |
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".