MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168439391 · doi:10.1111/1348-0421.12290

<i>Streptococcus panodentis</i> sp. nov. from the oral cavities of chimpanzees

2015· article· en· W2168439391 on OpenAlexaff
Masaaki Okamoto, Susumu Imai, Mayu Miyanohara, Wataru Saito, Yasuko Momoi, Yoshiaki Nomura, Tomoko Ikawa, Takumi Ogawa, Takako Miyabe‐Nishiwaki, Akihisa Kaneko, Akino Watanabe, Shohei Watanabe, Misato Hayashi, Masaki Tomonaga, Nobuhiro Hanada

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrobiology and Immunology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStreptococcal Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsrpoBBiology16S ribosomal RNAStreptococcus mitisHousekeeping geneMicrobiologyGeneRibosomal RNASequence analysisStreptococcusBacteriaGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three strains TKU9, TKU49 and TKU50(T) , were isolated from the oral cavities of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). The isolates were all gram-positive, facultative anaerobic cocci that lacked catalase activity. Analysis of partial 16S rRNA gene sequences showed that the most closely related species was Streptococcus infantis (96.7%). The next most closely related species to the isolates were S. rubneri, S. mitis, S. peroris and S. australis (96.6 to 96.4%). Based on the rpoB and gyrB gene sequences, TKU50(T) was clustered with other member of the mitis group. Enzyme activity and sugar fermentation patterns differentiated this novel bacterium from other members of the mitis group streptococci. The DNA G + C content of strain TKU50(T) was 46.7 mol%, which is the highest reported value for members of the mitis group (40-46 mol%). On the basis of the phenotypic characterization, partial 16S rRNA gene and sequences data for two housekeeping gene (gyrB and rpoB), we propose a novel taxa, S. panodentis for TKU 50(T) (type strain = CM 30579(T) = DSM 29921(T) ), for these newly described isolates.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrobiology and ImmunologySame topicStreptococcal Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207