Profiles from Biolog FF plates and morphological characteristics support the recognition of Oidiodendron fimicola sp. nov.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Oidiodendron fimicola sp. nov., represented by two collections from mushroom compost, is distinct from other species in the genus in having scaly conidiophores and asperulate, hyaline to melanized, barrel-shaped to irregular conidia. By light microscopy, it most closely resembles Oidiodendron flavum; by scanning electron microscopy the two species can be clearly distinguished based on perispore morphology and on the formation of distinctive scale-like protrusions on conidiophores of O. fimicola. We were unable to obtain DNA from O. fimicola despite repeated attempts. As a result, we investigated the use of Biolog profiles as a source of taxonomic characters for delimiting the new species among a selection of related taxa. Biolog FF profiles for 42 isolates, representing 19 species of Oidiodendron and Myxotrichum, were analysed using cluster analyses in PC-ORD. Because the reliability of Biolog FF kits with Oidiodendron species has not previously been assayed, multiple replicate tests were done for some isolates. Each of the resulting 54 data sets was unique; that is to say, variation occurred among isolates of the same species and in replicate trials of individual isolates, in addition to being seen in connection with differences among species. Despite this degree of test variability, it was possible to reliably distinguish O. fimicola, O. rhodogenum, O. truncatum, and most isolates of O. maius and O. periconioides with Biolog FF profiles. Four isolates of an as yet undescribed species of Oidiodendron also gave consistent profiles supporting their conspecificity. Taxonomic novelties: Oidiodendron fimicola Rice & Currah sp. nov.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".