MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2960613601 · doi:10.1101/702647

Resolution and co-occurrence patterns of <i>Gardnerella leopoldii</i> , <i>Gardnerella swidsinskii</i> , <i>Gardnerella piotii</i> and <i>Gardnerella vaginalis</i> within the vaginal microbiome

2019· preprint· en· W2960613601 on OpenAlexaffabout
Janet E. Hill, Arianne Albert

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsB.C. Women's Hospital & Health CentreWomen's Health Research InstituteUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGardnerella vaginalisBiologyMicrobiomeMicrobiologyBacterial vaginosisZoologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Gardnerella vaginalis is a hallmark of vaginal dysbiosis, but is found in the microbiomes of women with and without vaginal symptoms. G. vaginalis encompasses diverse taxa differing in attributes that are potentially important for virulence, and there is evidence that ‘clades’ or ‘subgroups’ within the species are differentially associated with clinical outcomes. The G. vaginalis species description was recently emended, and three new species within the genus were defined ( leopoldii , swidsinskii , piotii ). 16S rRNA sequences for the four Gardnerella species are all >98.5% identical and no signature sequences differentiate them. Results We demonstrated that Gardnerella species can be resolved using partial chaperonin-60 (cpn60) sequences, with pairwise percent identities of 87.1-97.8% among the type strains. Pairwise co-occurrence patterns of Gardnerella spp. in the vaginal microbiomes of 413 reproductive aged Canadian women were investigated, and several significant co-occurrences of species were identified. Abundance of G. vaginalis , and swidsinskii was associated with vaginal symptoms of abnormal odour and discharge. Conclusions cpn60 barcode sequencing can provide a rapid assessment of the relative abundance of Gardnerella spp. in microbiome samples, providing a powerful method of elucidating associations between these diverse organisms and clinical outcomes. Researchers should consider using cpn60 in place of 16S RNA for better resolution of these important organisms.

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)0.000
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 score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207