MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Portal protein diversity and phage ecology

2011· article· en· W2322115156 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew B. Sullivan, Maureen L. Coleman, Vanessa H. Quinlivan, Jessica E. Rosenkrantz, Alicia S. DeFrancesco, G. Tan, Ross Fu, Jessica A. Lee, John Waterbury, Joseph P. Bielawski, Sallie W. Chisholm

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Microbiology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBacteriophages and microbial interactions
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGeneAgaroseGeneticsGenomeDNAComputational biologyMolecular biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent whole-genome cyanophage sequencing (Sullivan et al., 2010) has revealed that the sequences of some genes do not match those published previously as single-gene sequences derived from DNA fragments PCR-amplified from phage isolates. Specifically, the g20 gene sequences for S-SSM7 (gene GI:189397276, protein GI:189397277) and Syn33 (gene GI:189397306, protein GI:189397307) in Sullivan and colleagues (2008) were incorrect. The revised sequences do not alter g20 tree topology or the conclusions of Sullivan and colleagues (2008). The source of error for these gene sequences is not certain, but could have its origin in either a clerical error, PCR contamination and/or mixed phage stocks. On this latter point, it has recently come to light that triplicate plaque purifications do not always result in pure stocks for these cyanophages, possibly due to the fluid consistency of the agarose plates (0.28% agarose) required for growth of the host. More reliable purification procedures have subsequently been developed. However, as mixed phage stock preparations could influence host range, we recommend that published host range data (Sullivan et al., 2003) be verified before their use in further research.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.001

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 head0.170
Teacher spread0.160 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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