Phylogenomic analysis of the Neocallimastigomycota: proposal of Caecomycetaceae fam. nov., Piromycetaceae fam. nov., and emended description of the families Neocallimastigaceae and Anaeromycetaceae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The anaerobic gut fungi (AGF) represent a coherent phylogenetic clade within the Mycota. Twenty genera have been described so far. Currently, the phylogenetic and evolutionary relationships between AGF genera remain poorly understood. Here, we utilized 52 transcriptomic datasets from 14 genera to resolve AGF inter-genus relationships using phylogenomics, and to provide a quantitative estimate (amino acid identity, AAI) for intermediate rank assignments. We identify four distinct supra-genus clades, encompassing all genera producing polyflagellated zoospores, bulbous rhizoids, the broadly circumscribed genus Piromyces , and the Anaeromyces and affiliated genera. We also identify the genus Khoyollomyces as the earliest evolving AGF genus. Concordance between phylogenomic outputs and RPB1 and D1/D2 LSU, but not RPB2, MCM7, EF1α or ITS1, phylogenies was observed. We combine phylogenomic analysis and AAI outputs with informative phenotypic traits to propose accommodating 14/20 AGF genera into four families: Caecomycetaceae fam. nov. (encompassing the genera Caecomyces and Cyllamyces ), Piromycetaceae fam. nov. (encompassing the genus Piromyces ), emend the description of the family Neocallimastigaceae to encompass the genera Neocallimastix , Orpinomyces , Pecoramyces , Feramyces , Ghazallomyces , Aestipascuomyces and Paucimyces , as well as the family Anaeromycetaceae to include the genera Oontomyces , Liebetanzomyces and Capellomyces in addition to Anaeromyces . We refrain from proposing families for the deeply branching genus Khoyollomyces and for genera with uncertain position ( Buwchfawromyces , Joblinomyces , Tahromyces , Agriosomyces and Aklioshbomyces ) pending availability of additional isolates and sequence data; and these genera are designated as ‘genera incertae sedis’ in the order Neocallimastigales . Our results establish an evolutionary-grounded Linnaean taxonomic framework for the AGF, provide quantitative estimates for rank assignments, and demonstrate the utility of RPB1 as an additional informative marker in Neocallimastigomycota taxonomy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".