Ca3 Fingerprinting of <i>Candida albicans</i> Bloodstream Isolates from the United States, Canada, South America, and Europe Reveals a European Clade
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It was previously demonstrated by a cluster analysis that 26 unrelated U.S. isolates of Candida albicans separated into three distinct groups (groups I, II, and III) while South African isolates separated into four distinct groups (groups I, II, III, and SA). To verify the absence or underrepresentation of SA isolates in North America, and to identify which groups are represented in Europe and South America, collections of bloodstream isolates from each geographical locale were analyzed by cluster analyses based on genetic fingerprinting with the Ca3 probe. The results verify that North America is almost devoid of SA isolates (2%). However, the results reveal a new clade, designated group E, relatively specific to Europe. While 26% of a European collection of 46 isolates was composed of group E isolates, only 2% of the 164 North American isolates, 5% of 22 South American isolates, and 1% of 361 South African isolates were composed of group E isolates. The North American collection proved to be the least-diverse collection in regard to group representation. In a comparison of collections from the Northeast, Midwest, and Southwest regions of the United States, Canada, and South America, it was demonstrated that both the U.S. Southwest and the South American collections were devoid of group II isolates. Together these results identify for the first time a European-specific clade and demonstrate clear distinctions in the representations of the five demonstrated clades (groups I, II, III, SA, and E) in different geographical locales.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".