Lignocelluloytic activities and composition of bacterial community in the camel rumen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The camel is well-adapted to utilize the poor-quality forages in the harsh desert conditions as the camel rumen sustains fibrolytic microorganisms, mainly bacteria that are capable of breaking down the lignocellulosic biomass efficiently. Exploring the composition of the bacterial community in the rumen of the camel and quantifying their cellulolytic and xylanolytic activities could lead to understanding and improving fiber fermentation and discovering novel sources of cellulases and xylanases. In this study, Illumina MiSeq sequencing of the V4 region on 16S rRNA was applied to identify the bacterial and archaeal communities in the rumen of three camels fed wheat straw and broom corn. Furthermore, rumen samples were inoculated into bacterial media enriched with xylan and different cellulose sources, including filter paper (FP), wheat straw (WS), and alfalfa hay (AH) to assess the ability of rumen bacteria to produce endo-cellulase and endo-xylanase at different fermentation intervals. The results revealed that the phylum Bacteroidetes dominated the bacterial community and Candidatus Methanomethylophilus dominated the archaeal community. Also, most of the bacterial community has fibrolytic potential and the dominant bacterial genera were Prevotella, RC9_gut_group, Butyrivibrio, Ruminococcus, Fibrobacteres, and Treponema. The highest xylanase production (884.8 mU/mL) was observed at 7 days. The highest cellulase production (1049.5 mU/mL) was observed when rumen samples were incubated with Alfalfa hay for 7 days.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".