Phylogenetic placement of lichenicolous Phoma species in the Phaeosphaeriaceae (Pleosporales, Dothideomycetes)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
More than twenty species of lichenicolous fungi have been described in Phoma , a large anamorphic genus of primarily plant-associated pathogens with broad geographic distributions. We obtained nuclear and mitochondrial rDNA sequences from 19 fungal cultures isolated from specimens representing four described and two undescribed lichenicolous species in the genus. Our multilocus phylogeny indicates that lichenicolous Phoma species represent at least two phylogenetically distinct clades in the Phaeosphaeriaceae, one including a new species, Phoma puncteliae, isolated from a specimen of Punctelia rudecta collected in Maryland, USA, and another group of primarily lichenicolous species. This latter group includes four described lichenicolous Phoma species, an unidentified melanized rock fungus, and a new lichenicolous Phoma species isolated from Xanthomendoza species collected in Canada that we are naming P. xanthomendozae. Some specimens in this clade collected from different lichen genera and species were found to be very similar genetically, which calls into question the recent practice of recognizing lichenicolous Phoma species mainly by differences in host preference.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".