Transplantation and subsequent behavior of mitochondria in cells of <i>Phytophthora</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mitochondria isolated from streptomycin-resistant (S(r)) protoplasts of Phytophthora parasitica were transferred into chloramphenicol-resistant (Cpr) protoplasts of P. parasitica or Phytophthora capsici with an average successful rate of 1.7 x 10(-4), using a selective medium containing streptomycin. No colonies appeared when self-fusion products of donor mitochondria or recipient protoplasts were exposed to the selective medium. Mitochondria isolated from Cpr protoplasts of P. capsici were also transferred into S(r) protoplasts of P. parasitica with a similar success rate using a selective medium containing chloramphenicol. Zoospores produced by the Cpr + S(r) intraspecific mitochondrial hybrid gave rise to S(r) and Cpr + S(r) cultures. The second generation zoospores produced by S(r) and Cpr + S(r) cultures also gave rise to S(r) and Cpr + S(r) cultures, suggesting the possible occurrence of fusion between some of the Cpr mitochondria and S(r) mitochondria, and the displacement of non-fused Cpr mitochondria in the receptor protoplast by the donor S(r) mitochondria. Zoospores produced by the interspecific mitochondrial hybrid gave rise to Cpr, S(r), Cpr + S(r), and Cps + Ss cultures. The second generation zoospores produced by Cpr + S(r) or S(r) cultures also gave rise to the same four types of cultures, suggesting the existence of residual antibiotic-sensitive mitochondria (Cps + Ss) in the parental isolates and the random distribution of Cpr, S(r), and Cps + Ss mitochondria during asexual reproduction. Results suggest that the phenotype of antibiotic resistance/sensitivity was the end result of the interactions among the three types of mitochondria.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".