Compensatory Base Changes in ITS2 Secondary Structure Alignment, Modelling, and Molecular Phylogeny: An Integrated Approach to Improve Species Delimitation in Tulasnella (Basidiomycota)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The delimitation of species of Tulasnella has been extensively studied, mainly at the morphological (sexual and asexual states) and molecular levels—showing ambiguity between them. An integrative species concept that includes characteristics such as molecular, ecology, morphology, and other information is crucial for species delimitation in complex groups such as Tulasnella. Objectives: The aim of this study is to test evolutionary relationships using a combination of alignment-based and alignment-free distance matrices as an alternative molecular tool to traditional methods, and to consider the secondary structures and CBCs from ITS2 (internal transcribed spacer) sequences for species delimitation in Tulasnella. Methodology: Three phylogenetic approaches were plotted: (i) alignment-based, (ii) alignment-free, and (iii) a combination of both distance matrices using the DISTATIS and pvclust libraries from an R package. Finally, the secondary structure consensus was modeled by Mfold, and a CBC analysis was obtained to complement the species delimitation using 4Sale. Results and Conclusions: The phylogenetic tree results showed delimited monophyletic clades in Tulasnella spp., where all 142 Tulasnella sequences were divided into two main clades A and B and assigned to seven species (T. asymmetrica, T. andina, T. eichleriana ECU6, T. eichleriana ECU4 T. pinicola, T. violea), supported by bootstrap values from 72% to 100%. From the 2D secondary structure alignment, three types of consensus models with helices and loops were obtained. Thus, T. albida belongs to type I; T. eichleriana, T. tomaculum, and T. violea belong to type II; and T. asymmetrica, T. andina, T. pinicola, and T. spp. (GER) belong to type III; each type contains four to six domains, with nine CBCs among these that corroborate different species.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".