Therrya strobi Lan Zhuo & C. L. Hou 2025, comb. nov.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Therrya strobi (J. Reid & Cain) Lan Zhuo & C. L. Hou comb. nov. Coccomyces strobi J. Reid & Cain, Can. J. Bot. 39 (5): 1127. 1961. Basionym. Type. CANADA, Ontario, Simcoe County, Midhurst, on Pinus strobus L. (Pinaceae), 4 Jun. 1951, R. F. Cain, TRTC 23,578 (holotype). Notes. Reid and Cain (1961) described Co. strobi on branches of Pinus strobus in the genus Coccomyces. In the phylogenetic tree, Co. strobi is closely related to Therrya species; ITS rDNA sequences similarities with other Therrya species range from 91.86 % – 97.62 %. In the phylogenetic analyses, sequences from seven isolates of Co. strobi formed two clades. Among them, isolates NB- 645 C, NB- 641 A, DAOMC 251937, DAOMC 251589, and DAOMC 251575 were submitted by Tanney J. B. in McMullin et al. (2018). Their study provides detailed information on isolation sources, and morphological illustrations, which agree with the typical description of Co. strobi, and establishes the correspondence between morphology and phylogeny. Therefore, the sequences from these isolates form a clade representing Co. strobi. In contrast, the sequence from isolate AFTOL-ID 1250 formed a separate branch, suggesting that it may represent a different species. Further examination of the material is needed to confirm its taxonomic status. The tips of the paraphyses of Co. strobi are curled, coiled, tending to form an epithecium, therefore, according to the morphological characters and phylogenetic relationship, Co. strobi belongs to the genus Therrya.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.019 |
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".