MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094452880 · doi:10.1099/ijs.0.046979-0

Emendation of the description of the species Corynebacterium propinquum to include strains which produce urease

2012· article· en· W2094452880 on OpenAlexaff
Kathryn Bernard, Ana Luisa Pacheco, Ian A. Cunningham, Navdeep Gill, Tamara Burdz, Deborah Wiebe

Bibliographic record

VenueINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC AND EVOLUTIONARY MICROBIOLOGY · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiphtheria, Corynebacterium, and Tetanus
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of ManitobaPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyUreaseMicrobiologyCorynebacteriumBacteriaBiochemistryGeneticsEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Corynebacterium propinquum is a Gram-positive rod occasionally recovered from clinical infections which, according to 16S rRNA gene sequencing, is most closely related (>99% sequence similarity) to Corynebacterium pseudodiphtheriticum. The two species are very similar biochemically, commonly differentiated by a single test, the detection of urease, where strains of C. propinquum are described as being urease-non-producing and strains of C. pseudodiphtheriticum are described as urease-producing. In this study, historical and contemporary strains of C. propinquum and C. pseudodiphtheriticum from this laboratory were definitively characterized, which included use of rpoB sequencing. Urease-producing strains of C. propinquum as well as typical urease-non-producing isolates were identified after rpoB sequencing, with six of these being originally identified as C. pseudodiphtheriticum. Based on these observations, we propose emendation of the description of C. propinquum to include strains which produce urease. MALDI-TOF analysis may be a useful tool to differentiate these taxa. Existing commercial databases should be updated to include urease-positive strains of C. propinquum.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC AND EVOLUTIONARY MICROBIOLOGYSame topicDiphtheria, Corynebacterium, and TetanusFrench-language works237,207