MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2182796952 · doi:10.1111/1462-2920.13154

Prophages of the genus <scp> <i>B</i> </scp> <i>ifidobacterium</i> as modulating agents of the infant gut microbiota

2015· article· en· W2182796952 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriele Andrea Lugli, Christian Milani, Francesca Turroni, Denise M. Tremblay, Chiara Ferrario, Leonardo Mancabelli, Sabrina Duranti, Doyle V. Ward, Maria Cristina Ossiprandi, Sylvain Moineau, Douwe van Sinderen, Marco Ventura

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Microbiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBacteriophages and microbial interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersScience Foundation Ireland
KeywordsBiologyProphageGenomeMicrobiomeGut floraBifidobacteriumEvolutionary biologyBacterial genome sizeGeneticsMetagenomicsMicrobiologyGenusBacteriophageBacteriaZoologyLactobacillusGeneImmunologyEscherichia coli

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phage predation is one of the key forces that shape genetic diversity in bacterial genomes. Phages are also believed to act as modulators of the microbiota composition and, consequently, as agents that drive bacterial speciation in complex bacterial communities. Very little is known about the occurrence and genetic variability of (pro)phages within the Bifidobacterium genus, a dominant bacterial group of the human infant microbiota. Here, we performed cataloguing of the predicted prophage sequences from the genomes of all currently recognized bifidobacterial type strains. We analysed their genetic diversity and deduced their evolutionary development, thereby highlighting an intriguing origin. Furthermore, we assessed infant gut microbiomes for the presence of (pro)phage sequences and found compelling evidence that these viral elements influence the composition of bifidobacterial communities in the infant gut microbiota.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score0.704

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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations76
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental MicrobiologySame topicBacteriophages and microbial interactionsFrench-language works237,207