Virulence in an insect model differs between mating types in<i>Aspergillus fumigatus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aspergillus fumigatus is an opportunistic fungal pathogen that has recently been found to undergo sexual reproduction. Previous work suggested that invasiveness differs between mating types, and in the present study we tested whether virulence differs between mating types in an in vivo model, i.e., larvae of the wax moth Galleria mellonella. We measured virulence of 20 A. fumigatus isolates; three MAT1-1 isolates of environmental origin, five MAT1-1 isolates of clinical origin, seven MAT1-2 isolates of environmental origin and five MAT1-2 isolates of clinical origin. For each isolate, we measured virulence in six replicates and for each replicate, conidia were grown, harvested, and counted independently, and 2,500 colony forming units were injected into each of 10 G. mellonella larvae. Virulence differed between mating types, with lower survival in larvae injected with MAT1-1 isolates. Virulence also differed between clinical and environmental isolates, but surprisingly larvae injected with environmental isolates had lower survival. Identification of the mechanisms underlying variation in virulence may identify novel targets for the treatment of Aspergillus infections.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".