MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Isolation and Phylogenetic Analysis of Novel Viruses Infecting the Phytoplankton <i>Phaeocystis globosa</i> (Prymnesiophyceae)

2004· article· en· W2050676296 on OpenAlexaff
Corina P. D. Brussaard, Steven M. Short, C. M. Frederickson, Curtis A. Suttle

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied and Environmental Microbiology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBacteriophages and microbial interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsBiologyPhylogenetic treePhytoplanktonAlgaeHost (biology)Algal bloomBotanyZoologyEcologyGeneGeneticsNutrient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Viruses infecting the harmful bloom-causing alga Phaeocystis globosa (Prymnesiophyceae) were readily isolated from Dutch coastal waters (southern North Sea) in 2000 and 2001. Our data show a large increase in the abundance of putative P. globosa viruses during blooms of P. globosa, suggesting that viruses are an important source of mortality for this alga. In order to examine genetic relatedness among viruses infecting P. globosa and other phytoplankton, DNA polymerase gene (pol) fragments were amplified and the inferred amino acid sequences were phylogenetically analyzed. The results demonstrated that viruses infecting P. globosa formed a closely related monophyletic group within the family Phycodnaviridae, with at least 96.9% similarity to each other. The sequences grouped most closely with others from viruses that infect the prymnesiophyte algae Chrysochromulina brevifilum and Chrysochromulina strobilus. Whether the P. globosa viruses belong to the genus Prymnesiovirus or form a separate group needs further study. Our data suggest that, like their phytoplankton hosts, the Chrysochromulina and Phaeocystis viruses share a common ancestor and that these prymnesioviruses and their algal host have coevolved.

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 score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations90
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied and Environmental MicrobiologySame topicBacteriophages and microbial interactionsFrench-language works237,207