Genomes and transcriptomes help unravel the complex life cycle of the blastoclad fungus, <i>Coelomomyces lativittatus,</i> an obligate parasite of mosquitoes and microcrustaceans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Species of the phylum Blastocladiomycota, early diverging zoosporic (flagellated) lineages of fungi, are vastly understudied. This phylum includes the genus Coelomomyces which consists of more than 80 fungal species that are obligate parasites of arthropods. Known Coelomomyces species lack a complete asexual life cycle, instead surviving through an obligate heteroecious alternation of generations life cycle. Despite their global distribution and interesting life cycle, little is known about the genomics of any Coelomomyces species. To address this, we generated three draft-level genomes and annotations for C. lativittatus representing its haploid meiospore, orange gamete, and amber gamete life stages. These draft genome assemblies ranged in size from 5002 to 5799 contigs with a total length of 19.8-22.8 Mb and a mean of 7416 protein-coding genes. We then demonstrated the utility of these genomes by combining the draft annotations as a reference for analysis of C. lativittatus transcriptomes. We analyzed transcriptomes from across host-associated life stages including infection of larva and excised mature sporangia from the mosquito, Anopheles quadrimaculatus . We identified differentially expressed genes and enriched GO terms both across and within life stages and used these to make hypotheses about C. lativittatus biology. Generally, we found the C. lativittatus transcriptome to be a complex and dynamic expression landscape; GO terms related to metabolism and transport processes were enriched during infection and terms related to dispersal were enriched during sporulation. We further identified five HMG box genes in C. lativittatus , three belonging to clades with mating type (MAT) loci from other fungi , as well as four ortholog expansions in C. lativittatus compared to other fungi. The C. lativittatus genomes and transcriptomes reported here are a valuable resource and may be leveraged toward furthering understanding of the biology of these and other early diverging fungal lineages.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".