Multilocus sequence analysis of Treponema denticolastrains of diverse origin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The oral spirochete bacterium Treponema denticola is associated with both the incidence and severity of periodontal disease. Although the biological or phenotypic properties of a significant number of T. denticola isolates have been reported in the literature, their genetic diversity or phylogeny has never been systematically investigated. Here, we describe a multilocus sequence analysis (MLSA) of 20 of the most highly studied reference strains and clinical isolates of T. denticola; which were originally isolated from subgingival plaque samples taken from subjects from China, Japan, the Netherlands, Canada and the USA. RESULTS: The sequences of the 16S ribosomal RNA gene, and 7 conserved protein-encoding genes (flaA, recA, pyrH, ppnK, dnaN, era and radC) were successfully determined for each strain. Sequence data was analyzed using a variety of bioinformatic and phylogenetic software tools. We found no evidence of positive selection or DNA recombination within the protein-encoding genes, where levels of intraspecific sequence polymorphism varied from 18.8% (flaA) to 8.9% (dnaN). Phylogenetic analysis of the concatenated protein-encoding gene sequence data (ca. 6,513 nucleotides for each strain) using Bayesian and maximum likelihood approaches indicated that the T. denticola strains were monophyletic, and formed 6 well-defined clades. All analyzed T. denticola strains appeared to have a genetic origin distinct from that of 'Treponema vincentii' or Treponema pallidum. No specific geographical relationships could be established; but several strains isolated from different continents appear to be closely related at the genetic level. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses indicate that previous biological and biophysical investigations have predominantly focused on a subset of T. denticola strains with a relatively narrow range of genetic diversity. Our methodology and results establish a genetic framework for the discrimination and phylogenetic analysis of T. denticola isolates, which will greatly assist future biological and epidemiological investigations involving this putative 'periodontopathogen'.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
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".