Archaeal habitats — from the extreme to the ordinary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The domain Archaea represents a third line of evolutionary descent, separate from Bacteria and Eucarya. Initial studies seemed to limit archaea to various extreme environments. These included habitats at the extreme limits that allow life on earth, in terms of temperature, pH, salinity, and anaerobiosis, which were the homes to hyper thermo philes, extreme (thermo)acidophiles, extreme halophiles, and methanogens. Typical environments from which pure cultures of archaeal species have been isolated include hot springs, hydrothermal vents, solfataras, salt lakes, soda lakes, sewage digesters, and the rumen. Within the past two decades, the use of molecular techniques, including PCR-based amplification of 16S rRNA genes, has allowed a culture-independent assessment of microbial diversity. Remarkably, such techniques have indicated a wide distribution of mostly uncultured archaea in normal habitats, such as ocean waters, lake waters, and soil. This review discusses organisms from the domain Archaea in the context of the environments where they have been isolated or detected. For organizational purposes, the domain has been separated into the traditional groups of methanogens, extreme halophiles, thermoacidophiles, and hyperthermophiles, as well as the uncultured archaea detected by molecular means. Where possible, we have correlated known energy-yielding reactions and carbon sources of the archaeal types with available data on potential carbon sources and electron donors and acceptors present in the environments. From the broad distribution, metabolic diversity, and sheer numbers of archaea in environments from the extreme to the ordinary, the roles that the Archaea play in the ecosystems have been grossly underestimated and are worthy of much greater scrutiny.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".