Necessity of Quality-Controlled 16S rRNA Gene Sequence Databases: Identifying Nontuberculous <i>Mycobacterium</i> Species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of the 16S rRNA gene for identification of nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) provides a faster and better ability to accurately identify them in addition to contributing significantly in the discovery of new species. Despite their associated problems, many rely on the use of public sequence databases for sequence comparisons. To best evaluate the taxonomic status of NTM species submitted to our reference laboratory, we have created a 16S rRNA sequence database by sequencing 121 American Type Culture Collection strains encompassing 92 species of mycobacteria, and have also included chosen unique mycobacterial sequences from public sequence repositories. In addition, the Ribosomal Differentiation of Medical Microorganisms (RIDOM) service has made freely available on the Internet mycobacterial identification by 16S rRNA analysis. We have evaluated 122 clinical NTM species using our database, comparing >1,400 bp of the 16S gene, and the RIDOM database, comparing approximately 440 bp. The breakdown of analysis was as follows: 61 strains had a sequence with 100% similarity to the type strain of an established species, 19 strains showed a 1- to 5-bp divergence from an established species, 11 strains had sequences corresponding to uncharacterized strain sequences in public databases, and 31 strains represented unique sequences. Our experience with analysis of the 16S rRNA gene of patient strains has shown that clear-cut results are not the rule. As many clinical, research, and environmental laboratories currently employ 16S-based identification of bacteria, including mycobacteria, a freely available quality-controlled database such as that provided by RIDOM is essential to accurately identify species or detect true sequence variations leading to the discovery of new species.
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 | 0.029 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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.
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".