MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Microsporidia: Biology and Evolution of Highly Reduced Intracellular Parasites

2002· review· en· W2112111732 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick J. Keeling, Naomi M. Fast

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Microbiology · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasitic Infections and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrosporidiaBiologyObligateIntracellular parasiteGenomePhylogeneticsProtozoaEvolutionary biologyMicrosporidiosisGenomicsZoologyIntracellularGeneticsGeneMicrobiologyEcologySpore

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microsporidia are a large group of microbial eukaryotes composed exclusively of obligate intracellular parasites of other eukaryotes. Almost 150 years of microsporidian research has led to a basic understanding of many aspects of microsporidian biology, especially their unique and highly specialized mode of infection, where the parasite enters its host through a projectile tube that is expelled at high velocity. Molecular biology and genomic studies on microsporidia have also drawn attention to many other unusual features, including a unique core carbon metabolism and genomes in the size range of bacteria. These seemingly simple parasites were once thought to be the most primitive eukaryotes; however, we now know from molecular phylogeny that they are highly specialized fungi. The fungal nature of microsporidia indicates that microsporidia have undergone severe selective reduction permeating every level of their biology: From cell structures to metabolism, and from genomics to gene structure, microsporidia are reduced.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations592
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of MicrobiologySame topicParasitic Infections and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207