<i>Fervidobacteriaceae</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Fer.vi.do.bac.te.ri.a.ce'ae. N.L. neut. n. Fervidobacterium , type genus of the family; L. fem. pl. suff. ‐aceae , ending to denote a family; N. L. fem. pl. n. Fervidobacteriaceae , the family whose nomenclatural type is the genus Fervidobacterium . The family Fervidobacteriaceae comprises sheathed thermophilic and hyperthermophilic , fermentative, and hydrogen‐producing bacteria. Cells are rod shaped, occurring singly, in pairs, and chains are also observed. The majority of the rods produced spheroids during growth. Strict anaerobe . Heterotrophic growth. Optimal growth at 65–80°C. Reduce sulfur to sulfide . The family currently accommodates two genera, Fervidobacterium and Thermosipho . Known habitats are hot springs, terrestrial geothermal aquifers, shallow and deep‐sea hydrothermal vents, and deep subsurface oil reservoirs. DNA G + C content (mol%) : 29.5–45.8. Type genus: Fervidobacterium Patel et al. 1985, VL19, emend. Bhandari and Gupta 2014. Taxonomic and Nomenclature Notes According to the List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (LPSN), the taxonomic status of the family Fervidobacteriaceae is: correct name (last update, April 2026) * . LPSN classification: Bacteria / Thermotogati / Thermotogota / Thermotogae / Thermotogales / Fervidobacteriaceae The family Fervidobacteriaceae can also be recovered in the Genome Taxonomy Database (GTDB) as f__Fervidobacteriaceae (version v232) ** . GTDB classification: d__Bacteria / p__Thermotogota / c__Thermotogae / o__Thermotogales / f__Fervidobacteriaceae * Freese , H.M. , Meier‐Kolthoff , J.P. , Sardà Carbasse , J. , Afolayan , A.O. , Göker , M. ( 2026 ). TYGS and LPSN in 2025: a Global Core Biodata Resource for genome‐based classification and nomenclature of prokaryotes within DSMZ Digital Diversity. Nucleic Acids Res , 54 (), D884 – D891 ; doi: 10.1093/nar/gkaf1110 ** Parks , D.H. , Chaumeil , P.‐A. , Mussig , A.J.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.048 | 0.037 |
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".