Localization of fungal fimbriae by immunocytochemistry in pathogenic and nonpathogenic isolates of <i>Venturia inaequalis</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pathogenic and nonpathogenic isolates of Venturia inaequalis were grown in liquid culture. Hyphae were treated with two types of fimbrial antiserum (AU- and AV-1) and examined by immunofluorescent microscopy, in order to establish the distribution of fimbrial epitopes in whole cell mounts. The AV-1 antiserum was specific for the glycoprotein subunits while the AU- antiserum was specific for the protein moieties present on the fimbriae of Mycobotryum violaceum. The use of fimbrial antiserum with immunocytochemistry and transmission electron microscopy demonstrated a clear distinction between pathogenic and nonpathogenic isolates of V. inaequalis, based on the appearance of the fungal cell wall and the distribution of fimbrial epitopes labeled with AV-1 antiserum and immunogold complex. In actively growing hyphae of the pathogenic isolate, characterized by distinct cellular organelles, small vacuoles, and lipid bodies, fimbrial epitopes were concentrated in the fungal cell wall and were present minimally on the outer surface. In contrast, actively growing hyphae of the nonpathogenic isolate of V. inaequalis had extensive fine hair-like protrusions in the fungal cell wall which labeled with the AV-1 antiserum and immunogold. The distribution of fimbrial epitopes in V. inaequalis was highly dependent on the developmental growth stage of the fungal mycelium. Aging mycelia in both the pathogenic and nonpathogenic isolates of V. inaequalis were characterized by a large central vacuole and no label. In the pathogenic and nonpathogenic isolates of V. inaequalis grown in vitro, the distribution of fimbrial glycoprotein epitopes provided a more complex profile than that seen in M. violaceum.Key words: fimbriae, immunocytochemistry, Venturia inaequalis, Mycobotryum violaceum.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".