The Genomic Diversity and Phylogenetic Relationship in the Family Iridoviridae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Iridoviridae family are large viruses (∼120-200 nm) that contain a linear double-stranded DNA genome. The genomic size of Iridoviridae family members range from 105,903 bases encoding 97 open reading frames (ORFs) for frog virus 3 to 212,482 bases encoding 211 ORFs for Chilo iridescent virus. The family Iridoviridae is currently subdivided into five genera: Chloriridovirus, Iridovirus, Lymphocystivirus, Megalocytivirus, and Ranavirus. Iridoviruses have been found to infect invertebrates and poikilothermic vertebrates, including amphibians, reptiles, and fish. With such a diverse array of hosts, there is great diversity in gene content between different genera. To understand the origin of iridoviruses, we explored the phylogenetic relationship between individual iridoviruses and defined the core-set of genes shared by all members of the family. In order to further explore the evolutionary relationship between the Iridoviridae family repetitive sequences were identified and compared. Each genome was found to contain a set of unique repetitive sequences that could be used in future virus identification. Repeats common to more than one virus were also identified and changes in copy number between these repeats may provide a simple method to differentiate between very closely related virus strains. The results of this paper will be useful in identifying new iridoviruses and determining their relationship to other members of the family.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".