<i>Catabacter hongkongensis</i>gen. nov., sp. nov., Isolated from Blood Cultures of Patients from Hong Kong and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four bacterial isolates were recovered from the blood cultures of four patients, two of whom were from Hong Kong and two of whom were from Canada. The two Hong Kong strains were isolated from a 48-year-old man with intestinal obstruction and secondary sepsis (strain HKU16T) and from a 39-year-old man with acute appendicitis (strain HKU17), while the two Canadian strains were isolated from a 74-year-old man with biliary sepsis (strain CA1) and from a 66-year-old woman with metastatic carcinoma and sepsis (strain CA2). While the first three patients survived, the last patient died 2 weeks after the episode of bacteremia. All four isolates are strictly anaerobic, nonsporulating, gram-positive coccobacilli that were unidentified by conventional phenotypic tests and commercial identification systems. They grow on sheep blood agar as nonhemolytic pinpoint colonies after 48 h of incubation at 37 degrees C in an anaerobic environment. All are catalase positive and motile, with flagella. They produce acid from arabinose, glucose, mannose, and xylose. They do not produce indole or reduce nitrate. They are sensitive to penicillin, vancomycin, and metronidazole but resistant to cefotaxime. 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis showed 16.0%, 16.8%, and 21.0% base differences from Clostridium propionicum, Clostridium neopropionicum, and Atopobium minutum, respectively. The G+C content of strain HKU16T is 40.2% +/- 2.2%. Based on their phylogenetic affiliation, unique G+C content, and phenotypic characteristics, we propose a new genus and species, Catabacter hongkongensis gen. nov., sp. nov., to describe the bacterium, for which HKU16 is the type strain, and suggest that it be assigned to a new family, Catabacteriaceae. The gastrointestinal tract was probably the source of the bacterium for at least three of the four patients. The isolation of a catalase-positive, motile, nonsporulating, anaerobic gram-positive bacillus in clinical laboratories should raise the possibility of C. hongkongensis. Further studies should be performed to ascertain the epidemiology and other disease associations of this bacterium.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".