MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2583467547 · doi:10.1128/msphere.00019-17

Global Population Genetic Analysis of Aspergillus fumigatus

2017· article· en· W2583467547 on OpenAlexafffund
Eta E. Ashu, Ferry Hagen, Anuradha Chowdhary, Jacques F. Meis, Jianping Xu

Bibliographic record

VenuemSphere · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsAspergillus fumigatusBiologyMicrosatelliteGenetic diversityGene flowGenetic variationPopulationGeneticsFungal pathogenGeneEvolutionary biologyMicrobiologyAlleleMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genetic diversity and geographic structure of the human fungal pathogen A. fumigatus have been the subject of many studies. However, most previous studies had relatively limited sample ranges and sizes and/or used genetic markers with low-level polymorphisms. In this paper, we characterize a global collection of strains of A. fumigatus using a panel of 9 highly polymorphic microsatellite markers. Using these markers, we analyze 2,026 isolates, which is ~3 times the number of isolates reported so far in previous studies. Our analyses suggest that A. fumigatus contains historically differentiated genetic populations but that its evolution is significantly impacted by contemporary forces such as widespread gene flow and local antifungal drug pressure. In the wake of a global rise in resistance to azoles in fungal pathogens, our findings should aid in developing management strategies to mitigate current increases to azole resistance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations85
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemSphereSame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207