A long-term prospecting study on giant viruses in terrestrial and marine Brazilian biomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The discovery of mimivirus in 2003 prompted the search for novel giant viruses worldwide. Despite increasing interest, the diversity and distribution of giant viruses is barely known. Here, we present data from a 2012-2022 study aimed at prospecting for amoebal viruses in water, soil, mud, and sewage samples across Brazilian biomes, using Acanthamoeba castellanii for isolation. A total of 881 aliquots from 187 samples covering terrestrial and marine Brazilian biomes were processed. Electron microscopy and PCR were used to identify the obtained isolates. Sixty-seven amoebal viruses were isolated, including mimiviruses, marseilleviruses, pandoraviruses, cedratviruses, and yaraviruses. Viruses were isolated from all tested sample types and almost all biomes. In comparison to other similar studies, our work isolated a substantial number of Marseillevirus and cedratvirus representatives. Taken together, our results used a combination of isolation techniques with microscopy, PCR, and sequencing and put highlight on richness of giant virus present in different terrestrial and marine Brazilian biomes.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".