Combined cultivation and single-cell approaches to the phylogenomics of nucleariid amoebae, close relatives of fungi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nucleariid amoebae (Opisthokonta) have been known since the nineteenth century but their diversity and evolutionary history remain poorly understood. To overcome this limitation, we have obtained genomic and transcriptomic data from three Nuclearia , two Pompholyxophrys and one Lithocolla species using traditional culturing and single-cell genome (SCG) and single-cell transcriptome amplification methods. The phylogeny of the complete 18S rRNA sequences of Pompholyxophrys and Lithocolla confirmed their suggested evolutionary relatedness to nucleariid amoebae, although with moderate support for internal splits. SCG amplification techniques also led to the identification of probable bacterial endosymbionts belonging to Chlamydiales and Rickettsiales in Pompholyxophrys . To improve the phylogenetic framework of nucleariids, we carried out phylogenomic analyses based on two datasets of, respectively, 264 conserved proteins and 74 single-copy protein domains. We obtained full support for the monophyly of the nucleariid amoebae, which comprise two major clades: (i) Parvularia–Fonticula and (ii) Nuclearia with the scaled genera Pompholyxophrys and Lithocolla . Based on these findings, the evolution of some traits of the earliest-diverging lineage of Holomycota can be inferred. Our results suggest that the last common ancestor of nucleariids was a freshwater, bacterivorous, non-flagellated filose and mucilaginous amoeba. From the ancestor, two groups evolved to reach smaller ( Parvularia–Fonticula ) and larger ( Nuclearia and related scaled genera) cell sizes, leading to different ecological specialization. The Lithocolla + Pompholyxophrys clade developed exogenous or endogenous cell coverings from a Nuclearia -like ancestor. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue ‘Single cell ecology’.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".