Culture-independent phylogenetic analysis of the faecal flora of the rat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dominant faecal flora of the rat was determined using randomly cloned 16S rDNA comparative sequence analysis. A total of 109 near full-length 16S rDNA clones were sequenced, representing 69 unique 16S rRNA phylotypes or operational taxonomic units (OTUs). Estimates of species richness indicated that approximately 338 species were present in the faeces, suggesting that only 20% of species were identified. Only two of 39 Gram-negative clones aligned with previously cultured species, the remainder fell into a separate lineage within the Bacteroides-Cytophaga phylum. Several clones within this new group were related to 16S rDNA sequences previously identified from mouse faeces. Lactobacilli were the most abundant Gram-positive species, representing 23% of the total clones but only 7% of OTUs. The remaining Gram-positive clones were distributed among the Clostridium coccoides group (9%), the Clostridium leptum subgroup (18%), and throughout the low GC Gram-positive bacteria (13%). The majority of OTUs (63/69 or 91%) were less than 97% homologous to previously cultured bacteria. Faecal samples were also cultured using a variety of anaerobic media. With the exception of the lactobacilli, the cultured isolates demonstrated low species diversity and poorly reflected the population, as defined through comparative sequence analysis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".