Algicidal activity and gliding motility of <i>Saprospira</i> sp. SS98-5
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A marine bacterium, Saprospira sp. SS98-5, which was isolated from Kagoshima Bay, Japan, was able to kill and lyse the cells of the diatom Chaetoceros ceratosporum. The multicellular filamentous cells of this bacterium captured the diatom cells, formed cell aggregates, and lysed them in an enriched sea water (ESS) liquid medium. Strain SS98-5 also formed plaques on double layer agar plates incorporating diatom cells. The diatom cell walls were partially degraded at the contact sites with the bacteria, the bacteria invaded from there into the diatom cells, and then the diatom cells were completely lysed. The strain possessed gliding motility and grew as spreading colonies on ESS agar plates containing lower concentrations of polypeptone (below 0.1%) while forming nonspreading colonies on ESS agar plates containing 0.5% polypeptone. Electron micrographs of ultrathin sections demonstrated that microtubule-like structures were observable only in gliding motile cells. Both the gliding motility and the microtubule-like structures were diminished by the addition of podophyllotoxin, an inhibitor of microtubule assembly, suggesting that the microtubule-like structures observed in these bacterial cells are related to their gliding motility.
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) | 0.000 | 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".