MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126870625 · doi:10.1099/ijs.0.64097-0

Candida heliconiae sp. nov., Candida picinguabensis sp. nov. and Candida saopaulonensis sp. nov., three ascomycetous yeasts from Heliconia velloziana (Heliconiaceae)

2006· article· en· W2126870625 on OpenAlexaff
Carla C. C. Ruivo, Marc‐André Lachance, Carlos A. Rosa, Maurício Bacci, Fernando C. Pagnocca

Bibliographic record

VenueINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC AND EVOLUTIONARY MICROBIOLOGY · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicYeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersUniversidade Estadual Paulista
KeywordsBiologyBotanyTaxonomy (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Strains belonging to three novel yeast species, Candida heliconiae (four isolates), Candida picinguabensis (three isolates) and Candida saopaulonensis (two isolates), were recovered in the year 2000 from water of flower bracts of Heliconia velloziana L. Emigd. (Heliconiaceae) found in a forest ecosystem site in an Atlantic rainforest of south-eastern Brazil. C. picinguabensis and C. saopaulonensis were nearly identical in morphology and physiology, but sequence divergence in the D1/D2 domain of the large-subunit rDNA indicated that they should be regarded as different species. They belong to the Metschnikowiaceae clade. C. heliconiae had affinities to Pichia mexicana and related species, but was genetically isolated from all currently accepted species in that group. The type strains are C. heliconiae UNESP 00-91C1T (=CBS 10000T=NRRL Y-27813T), C. picinguabensis UNESP 00-89T (=CBS 9999T=NRRL Y-27814T) and C. saopaulonensis UNESP 00-99T (=CBS 10001T=NRRL Y-27815T).

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations25
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC AND EVOLUTIONARY MICROBIOLOGYSame topicYeasts and Rust Fungi StudiesFrench-language works237,207