MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970842946 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0221397

Distinction between Borrelia and Borreliella is more robustly supported by molecular and phenotypic characteristics than all other neighbouring prokaryotic genera: Response to Margos' et al. "The genus Borrelia reloaded" (PLoS ONE 13(12): e0208432)

2019· letter· en· W2970842946 on OpenAlexafffund
Radhey S. Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2019
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBorreliaBiologyGenusZoologyPhylogenetic treeEvolutionary biologyBorrelia burgdorferiGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a recent publication in PLOS ONE, Gabriele Margos and colleagues have questioned the division of the genus Borrelia into two genera on the basis that the differences in percentage of conserved proteins (POCP) between these two groups is >50%, which an earlier study has suggested as the threshold for differentiating prokaryotic genera. However, the POCP threshold is a poorly characterized and rarely used criterion for establishing distinction among prokaryotic genera. Detailed evaluation of the intergeneric POCP values for 37 genera from 3 different families (viz. Enterobacteriaceae- 24 genera, Morganellaceae-8 genera and Cystobacteraceae-5 genera) presented here shows that the POCP values for all genera within each of these families exceeded >58%. Thus, the suggested POCP threshold is not a useful criterion for delimitation of genus boundary and the objection by Margos et al. on this ground is invalid. Additionally, Margos et al. have questioned the specificities of ~15-20% of the conserved signature indels (CSIs) described in our work. However, as shown here, this concern is due to misunderstanding of the results and the CSIs in question are still highly-specific characteristics of the members of these genera and they provide important information regarding the evolutionary relationships of two new reptiles-echidna-related species viz. Borrelia turcica and Candidatus Borrelia tachyglossi to other Borrelia species. Results presented here show that both these species are deeper-branching members of the genus Borrelia and their placement within this genus is strongly supported by phylogenetic analyses and multiple uniquely shared CSIs with the other Borrelia species. Based on the large body of evidence derived from phylogenetic, genomic, molecular, phenotypic and clinical features, it is contended that the characteristics clearly distinguishing the Borrelia and Borreliella genera are far more numerous and of different kinds than those discerning most (all) other neighbouring genera of prokaryotes. Thus, the placement of these two groups of microorganisms into distinct genera, Borrelia and Borreliella, which clearly recognizes the differences among them, is highly appropriate and it should lead to a better understanding of the clinical, molecular and biological differences between these two important groups of microbes.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.220
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.

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

Citations68
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207