A remarkable and widespread new lichenicolous species of Mycocalicium (Sphinctrinaceae) producing campylidia-like conidiomata and appendiculate conidia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A lichenicolous fungus forming large black, vertically elongate, campylidia-like conidiomata on the thallus of Ochrolechia was recently collected in Austria, Mexico and the USA. The conidia are so remarkable in being multiappendiculate that initially no existing fungal genera appeared to be suitable for its description. Nevertheless, molecular phylogenetic analyses of nuITS and nuLSU sequences recovered the species within the genus Mycocalicium. To date, no species of Mycocaliciales has been reported producing appendiculate conidia. The species is described as new M. campylidiophorum. The new species was also discovered in the type specimen of Opegrapha chionographa that was collected in Colombia 163 years ago. This discovery led us to revise O. chionographa, originally described as a lichen, and clarify that in fact the name applies to a lichenicolous fungus based on type material that is an admixture of M. campylidiophorum, an Ochrolechia and an Opegrapha species. The name is shown to apply to the Opegrapha species and lectotypified as such. Opegrapha blakii is treated as synonym of O. chionographa.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".