MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110392073 · doi:10.1139/b02-113

Phylogeny of the rust fungi: an approach using nuclear large subunit ribosomal DNA sequences

2003· article· en· W2110392073 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wolfgang Maier, Dominik Begerow, Michael Weiß, Franz Oberwinkler

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicYeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsBiologyMonophylyBotanyRibosomal DNAPhylogenetic treeMolecular phylogeneticsCladeGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sequence data from nuclear large subunit ribosomal DNA was used to infer phylogenetic relationships of selected genera of the Uredinales. We investigated 52 rust fungi representing nine families and three outgroup species. Neighbor joining analysis and a Bayesian method of phylogenetic inference using Monte Carlo Markov chains confirm the rust fungi as a natural group and indicate that Puccinia, Uromyces, Endophyllum, and Cumminsiella have a common origin. The autoecious Rosaceae-rusts Phragmidium, Kuehneola, Triphragmium, and Trachyspora are a monophyletic group. The gasteroid genus Ochropsora is closely related to Tranzschelia. While the Pucciniastreae sensu Dietel (1938) is recognized as a monophyletic group in neighbor joining analysis, the Pucciniaceae s.l. (Dietel 1928) is supported by Bayesian analysis. The following genera appear to be monophyletic: Chrysomyxa, Coleosporium, Cronartium, Gymnosporangium, Melampsora, Phragmidium, and Tranzschelia, whereas the genera Puccinia, Pucciniastrum, Thekopsora, and Uromyces are not.Key words: molecular phylogeny, systematics, nuclear large subunit rDNA, Basidiomycota, Urediniomycetes, Uredinales.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations158
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicYeasts and Rust Fungi StudiesFrench-language works237,207