Cytology and molecular phylogenetics of Monoblepharidomycetes provide evidence for multiple independent origins of the hyphal habit in the Fungi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolution of filamentous hyphae underlies an astounding diversity of fungal form and function. We studied the cellular structure and evolutionary origins of the filamentous form in the Monoblepharidomycetes (Chytridiomycota), an early-diverging fungal lineage that displays an exceptional range of body types, from crescent-shaped single cells to sprawling hyphae. To do so, we combined light and transmission electron microscopic analyses of hyphal cytoplasm with molecular phylogenetic reconstructions. Hyphae of Monoblepharidomycetes lack a complex aggregation of secretory vesicles at the hyphal apex (i.e. Spitzenkörper), have centrosomes as primary microtubule organizing centers and have stacked Golgi cisternae instead of tubular/fenestrated Golgi equivalents. The cytoplasmic distribution of actin in Monoblepharidomycetes is comparable to the arrangement observed previously in other filamentous fungi. To discern the origins of Monoblepharidomycetes hyphae, we inferred a phylogeny of the fungi based on 18S and 28S ribosomal DNA sequence data with maximum likelihood and Bayesian inference methods. We focused sampling on Monoblepharidomycetes to infer intergeneric relationships within the class and determined 78 new sequences. Analyses showed class Monoblepharidomycetes to be monophyletic and nested within Chytridiomycota. Hyphal Monoblepharidomycetes formed a clade sister to the genera without hyphae, Harpochytrium and Oedogoniomyces. A likelihood ancestral state reconstruction indicated that hyphae arose independently within the Monoblepharidomycetes lineage and in at least two other lineages. Cytological differences among monoblepharidalean and other fungal hyphae are consistent with these convergent origins.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".