MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041704436 · doi:10.1099/ijs.0.051953-0

Wickerhamiella slavikovae sp. nov. and Wickerhamiella goesii sp. nov., two yeast species isolated from natural substrates

2013· article· en· W2041704436 on OpenAlexafffund
Allen N. Hagler, José Roberto Ribeiro, Tatiana Pinotti, Luciana R. Brandão, Raphael Sânzio Pimenta, Ulysses Lins, Ching-Fu Lee, Chin-Wen Hsieh, Marc‐André Lachance, Carlos A. Rosa

Bibliographic record

VenueINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC AND EVOLUTIONARY MICROBIOLOGY · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicYeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsBiologyYeastBotanyZoologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two novel yeast species were isolated during three independent studies of yeasts associated with natural substrates in Brazil and Taiwan. Analysis of the sequences of the D1/D2 domains of the large subunit rRNA gene showed that these novel species belong to the Wickerhamiella clade. The first was isolated from freshwater and a leaf of sugar cane (Saccharum officinarum) in Brazil and from leaves of Wedelia biflora in Taiwan. Described here as Wickerhamiella slavikovae sp. nov., it differs by 56 nucleotide substitutions and 19 gaps in the D1/D2 region of the large subunit rRNA gene from Candida sorbophila, the least divergent species. The second species, named Wickerhamiella goesii sp. nov., was isolated from leaves and the rhizosphere of sugar cane collected in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The species differs by 54 nucleotide substitutions and nine gaps in the D1/D2 domains from Candida drosophilae, its least divergent relative. The type strains are Wickerhamiella slavikovae sp. nov. IMUFRJ 52096(T) (= CBS 12417(T) = DBVPG 8032(T)) and Wickerhamiella goesii sp. nov. IMUFRJ 52102(T) (= CBS 12419(T) = DBVPG 8034(T)).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC AND EVOLUTIONARY MICROBIOLOGYSame topicYeasts and Rust Fungi StudiesFrench-language works237,207