Additional file 7 of Remnants of horizontal transfers of Wolbachia genes in a Wolbachia-free woodwasp
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Additional file 7: Figure S7. Maximum likelihood tree. It was constructed with the protein sequence of ORF9 compared to similar protein sequences of 20 Wolbachia strains and one protein sequence from Moorea producens (Cyanobacteria: Oscillatoriaceae). The branch indicated in red represents the position of ORF9 among other Wolbachia protein sequences. All Wolbachia strains are named after their hosts as follows: wAna, Drosophila ananassae; wAu, Drosophila simulans; wBt, Bemisia tabaci; wCfeT, Ctenocephalides felis; wCon, Cylisticus convexus; wDac, Dactylopius coccus; wDi, Diaphorina citri; wInc, Drosophila incompta; wKgib, Kradibia gibbosae; wMeg, Chrysomya megacephala; wMel, Drosophila melanogaster; wOb, Operophtera brumata; wOne, Nasonia oneida; wPip, Culex quinquefasciatus; wPol, Atemnus politus; wSan, Drosophila santomea; wStri, Laodelphax striatellus; wTei, Drosophila teissieri; wVulC, Armadillidium vulgare; wYak, Drosophila yakuba.
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 | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.851 | 0.272 |
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".