Corynebacterium canis sp. nov., isolated from a wound infection caused by a dog bite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A non-lipophilic, coryneform bacterium isolated from a patient's wound caused by a dog bite was characterized by phenotypic, chemotaxonomic and molecular genetic methods. Chemotaxonomic features suggested assignment of the unknown bacterium to the genus Corynebacterium. The isolate exhibited the following unusual features, which made it possible to phenotypically differentiate it from all other medically relevant corynebacteria: the Gram stain showed some very filamentous rods (>15 μm in length); some cells exhibited branching; colonies were domed and adherent to agar; the micro-organism was positive for pyrazinamidase, β-glucosidase, α-glucosidase and trypsin but negative for β-galactosidase. 16S rRNA gene sequencing and partial rpoB gene sequencing showed that the closest phylogenetic relative, Corynebacterium freiburgense, exhibited more than 1.9 % and 17.9 % divergence with the unknown bacterium, respectively. Based on both phenotypic and molecular genetic data, it is proposed that the isolate should be classified as a novel species, Corynebacterium canis sp. nov., with the type strain 1170(T) (=CCUG 58627(T) =DSM 45402(T)).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".