The ultrastructure of the dimorphic infection cells of <i>Haptoglossa heteromorpha </i>illustrates the developmental plasticity of infection apparatus structures in a nematode parasite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nematophagous fungus Haptoglossa heteromorpha Glockling & Beakes is unusual in this genus, as it consistently produces two morphologically distinct infection cells that develop respectively from the large and small aplanospores. The large infection cells are typical "gun cells" and are uninucleate with over half the cytoplasmic volume occupied by the basal vacuole. However, the small infection cells are considerably modified in their structure. They have an elongate tapered morphology with a bilobed base. Small infection cells are binucleate and contain both apical and basal vacuolar regions. The inverted injection tube is highly modified and originates at a raised padlike region on the mid ventral side of the cell. This protruding pad is associated with a diffuse covering of fibrillar material. The bore region extends deep into the cell and the highly compressed missile chamber is located beneath the hindmost nucleus, near the base of the cell. Finally, there is a more typical tube tail segment, which winds between the nuclei and eventually terminates beneath the anterior vacuole. The differences with gun cells of previously described Haptoglossa species are documented. The functional and biological significance of these two different infection cells is discussed. Only the large gun cells were observed to discharge to form sporidia. It seems unlikely that the highly modified smaller cells can infect in this way. It may be that the two different cell types have evolved to infect different hosts, but no direct confirmation of this could be obtained.Key words: Haptoglossa, host-parasite interactions, infection (gun) cell, nematophagous fungi, ultrastructure.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".