Analysis of restriction fragment length polymorphisms in the ribosomal DNA of a selection of anaerobic chytrids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anaerobic chytrid strains (representing four genera and seven species based on morphological characters), obtained from a variety of hosts, were analysed for variability within the 5' terminal segment of the ribosomal large subunit (LSU) gene, first internal transcribed spacer (ITS1), and the intergenic spacers (IGS) of the ribosomal repeat unit. In the analyses of the ribosomal LSU gene, strains of Neocallimastix, Orpinomyces, and Anaeromyces clustered into distinct groups, but Piromyces strains did not. Although the size of polymerase chain reaction products for the ITS1 region varied among strains, restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis was not useful in distinguishing between the strains. In the analyses of restriction fragment profiles of the IGS, strains of Orpinomyces and Anaeromyces clustered into distinct groupings that corresponded with morphological characters. In contrast, Neocallimastix strains clustered into two distinct groups. Considerable variability was observed in the IGS for strains of Piromyces. Analysis of this region split strains of Piromyces rhinzinflata obtained from a single bison into at least two distinct genetic groupings. Furthermore, the Piromyces strains obtained from bovine, wapiti, and moose clustered according to host. Overall, our molecular data suggest that morphological characters as observed under the light microscope are insufficient for the designation of phylogenetic species of Neocallimastix and Piromyces, and that integration of molecular and morphological data will be required to establish a natural classification system for the anaerobic members of the Chytridiomycota.Key words: anaerobic fungi, rumen, Chytridiomycota, ribosomal DNA, RFLP.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".