Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Lys.o.bac'ter. Gr. adj. lysis loosing; M.L. n. bacter equivalent of Gr. neut. n. bactrum a rod; M.L. masc. n. Lysobacter the loosing rod; intended to mean the lysing rod. Thin rods , 0.2–0.5 × 1.0–15 (sometimes up to 70) µm, which are Gram negative, nonflagellated, gliding, flexing , and aerobic. Colonies are highly mucoid, cream‐colored, pink, or yellow‐brown ; many strains also produce a brown, water‐soluble pigment. Nonfruiting; no microcysts produced. Growth in broth culture is silky. Most strains are resistant to actinomycin D. This organism degrades chitin and often other polysaccharides, but it does not degrade filter‐paper cellulose, and it infrequently degrades agar. Strongly proteolytic, characteristically lysing a variety of microorganisms (both Gram‐negative and Gram‐positive bacteria, including actinomycetes, blue‐green and green algae, yeasts, and filamentous fungi), as well as nematodes. Habitat: soil and freshwater. The mol % G + C of the DNA is : 65.4–70.1. Type species : Lysobacter enzymogenes Christensen and Cook 1978, 374. Taxonomic and Nomenclature Notes According to the List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (LPSN), the taxonomic status of the genus Lysobacter is: correct name (last update, February 2025) * . LPSN classification: Bacteria / Pseudomonadati / Pseudomonadota / Gammaproteobacteria / Lysobacterales / Lysobacteraceae / Lysobacter The genus Lysobacter can also be recovered in the Genome Taxonomy Database (GTDB) as g__Lysobacter (version v220) ** . GTDB classification: d__Bacteria / p__Pseudomonadota / c__Gammaproteobacteria / o__Xanthomonadales / f__Xanthomonadaceae / g__Lysobacter * Meier‐Kolthoff et al. ( 2022 ). Nucleic Acids Res , 50 , D801 – D807 ; DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab902 ** Parks et al. ( 2022 ). Nucleic Acids Res , 50 , D785 – D794 ; DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab776
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.131 | 0.115 |
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".