Systematic analysis of Russula in the North American Rocky Mountain alpine zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Russula Pers. (Russulales) is an important ectomycorrhizal fungal genus in alpine and Arctic regions where it occurs in association with Salix, Betula, Dryas, and Polygonum. Despite Russula’s importance and abundance in Arctic and alpine systems there has been no in-depth systematic analysis of the genus in these habitats. This is also true for alpine areas of the Rocky Mountains where only four species of Russula have been casually reported above treeline. The genus Russula is large, diverse, and intraspecific morphological variation makes taxonomic classification difficult, which means verification using molecular techniques is necessary. This research compared Rocky Mountain alpine Russula collections to Arctic and alpine collections from Europe using an in-depth morphological study and a systematic molecular analysis of the nuc rDNA ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 region (ITS barcode) and the second largest subunit of the RNA polymerase II gene (RPB2). Over 130 Russula collections were sequenced including type material. This research confirmed eight species with intercontinental distributions in Arctic and alpine habitats, including R. nana, R. laccata, R. subrubens, R. cf. pascua, R. heterochroa, R. saliceticola, R. purpureofusca, and R. laevis. Two species are reported from subalpine habitats at treeline; R. montana with conifers and R. altaica with Betula. The Russula present in the Rocky Mountain alpine represent a subset of those known from other Arctic-alpine habitats and data show that multiple Russula species independently colonized alpine habitats. This is the first formal report of R. altaica, R. saliceticola, and R. subrubens in the Rocky Mountains and of R. heterochroa and R. purpureofusca in North America. Previous work matched sequences extracted from ectomycorrhiza in Canada to R. laevis, but this is the first work to collect this species and report it in North America. A key for the identification of alpine Russula in North America is provided. A history of Arctic and alpine mycology in North America is included and provides background material for the study. This work contributes to our knowledge of biodiversity in Arctic and alpine systems and will promote future ecological and taxonomic research on alpine Russula because little is known about these species or how to identify them.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".