Phylogenetic Diversity of Marine Cyanophage Isolates and Natural Virus Communities as Revealed by Sequences of Viral Capsid Assembly Protein Gene g20
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to characterize the genetic diversity and phylogenetic affiliations of marine cyanophage isolates and natural cyanophage assemblages, oligonucleotide primers CPS1 and CPS8 were designed to specifically amplify ca. 592-bp fragments of the gene for viral capsid assembly protein g20. Phylogenetic analysis of isolated cyanophages revealed that the marine cyanophages were highly diverse yet more closely related to each other than to enteric coliphage T4. Genetically related marine cyanophage isolates were widely distributed without significant geographic segregation (i.e., no correlation between genetic variation and geographic distance). Cloning and sequencing analysis of six natural virus concentrates from estuarine and oligotrophic offshore environments revealed nine phylogenetic groups in a total of 114 different g20 homologs, with up to six clusters and 29 genotypes encountered in a single sample. The composition and structure of natural cyanophage communities in the estuary and open-ocean samples were different from each other, with unique phylogenetic clusters found for each environment. Changes in clonal diversity were also observed from the surface waters to the deep chlorophyll maximum layer in the open ocean. Only three clusters contained known cyanophage isolates, while the identities of the other six clusters remain unknown. Whether or not these unidentified groups are composed of bacteriophages that infect different Synechococcus groups or other closely related cyanobacteria remains to be determined. The high genetic diversity of marine cyanophage assemblages revealed by the g20 sequences suggests that marine viruses can potentially play important roles in regulating microbial genetic diversity.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".