Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lodderomyces elongisporus, a diploid ascomycete yeast, is attracting broad attention due to its increasing infection of humans.First discovered and described as Saccharomyces elongisporus in 1952 from Californian citrus concentrate [1], this yeast has since been isolated from many sources, including soil, fermented food products, plants, stored apples, pigeon excreta, insects, marine fish, hospital environments, and humans [2-6].Its medical relevance was first noted in 2008 when a retrospective analysis of 542 clinical Candida parapsilosis isolates from 25 countries revealed that ten isolates were actually L. elongisporus [7].Since then, infections caused by this fungus have been reported in 14 countries on 5 continents (Fig 1; Table 1).In 1966, the genus name Lodderomyces was proposed as a replacement for the original name Saccharomyces elongisporus to highlight its different physiological features from the type species of Saccharomyces [8].Despite the unique genus name, L. elongisporus closely resembles C. parapsilosis: they both grow as oval to elongated cells or in pseudohyphal form, forming cream-colored colonies on Sabouraud dextrose agar.Furthermore, they both can assimilate high molecular-weight paraffins.Therefore, clinical isolates of L. elongisporus have often been misidentified as C. parapsilosis by conventional methods such as API 20C, ID 32C, and Vitek 2 [7,9].However, researchers noticed this mistake after plating isolates previously identified as C. parapsilosis isolates on CHROMagar and finding that certain isolates formed turquoise blue colonies rather than the white to pale pink colonies typical of C. parapsilosis.Subsequent molecular analysis revealed that isolates forming turquoise blue colonies actually belonged to L. elongisporus.Phylogenetic analyses based on DNA sequences at a single gene, multiple genes, and whole genomes all clustered L. elongisporus into the Candida clade, closely related to the C. parapsilosis species complex that includes C. parapsilosis, Candida orthopsilosis, and Candida metapsilosis [10] (Fig 2).The L. elongisporus genome size (15 to 16 Mb) is slightly larger than that of C. parapsilosis (12 to 13 Mb) but in the range of several other common human pathogenic Candida species such as Candida albicans (14 to 16 Mb) and Candida tropicalis (14 to 15 Mb).Species in this clade also shared comparable gene numbers and a largely conserved gene order [11].Importantly, similar to other species in this clade, the CUG codon in L. elongisporus is translated to serine instead of leucine as in most other organisms [11].Together, these characteristics suggest that L. elongisporus should probably be changed to Candida elongisporus.Unique features of L. elongisporus as compared to other species within the CTG cladeAU : Pleaseconfirmthatallheadinglevelsarerepresentedcorrect Candida species that translate the CUG codons as serine rather than leucine belong to the commonly called CTG clade [12].This clade is notable because most of its members can cause diseases in humans.However, species within the CTG clade can vary significantly in several features, including their relative prevalence in humans, stress tolerance, and virulence
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".