A highly divergent Wolbachia with a tiny genome in an insect-parasitic tylenchid nematode
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wolbachia symbionts are the most successful host-associated microbes on the planet, infecting arthropods and nematodes. Their role in nematodes is particularly enigmatic, with filarial nematode species either 100% infected and dependent on symbionts for reproduction and development, or not at all infected. We have discovered a highly divergent strain of Wolbachia in an insect-parasitic tylenchid nematode, Howardula sp., in a nematode clade that has not previously been known to harbour Wolbachia. While this nematode is 100% infected with Wolbachia, we did not detect it in related species. We sequenced the Howardula symbiont (wHow) genome and found that it is highly reduced, comprising only 550 kilobase pairs of DNA, ~35% smaller than the smallest Wolbachia nematode symbiont genomes. The wHow genome is a subset of all other Wolbachia genomes and has not acquired any new genetic information. While it has lost many genes, including genes involved in cell wall synthesis and cell division, it has retained the entire heme biosynthesis pathway, suggesting that heme supplementation is critical. wHow provides key insights into our understanding of what are the lower limits of Wolbachia cells, as well as the role of Wolbachia symbionts in the biology and convergent evolution of diverse parasitic nematodes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.010 |
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".