Search NASASearch

subject

rrn markers

rrn markers: explore 1 source-linked works published from 2026 to 2026, with original documents and citations.

This collection is a preview while coverage and quality are evaluated.

Search within this collection

Coverage and selection

Includes records with this source-supplied label or an explicit phrase match in their metadata. Matches indicate a mention, not proof that a paper uses a method or tests a material. Source versions are consolidated by DOI.

Sources: osti. Collection updated 2026-09-17. Counts describe this index, not the complete source archives.

Full ribosomal operon sequencing of anaerobic gut fungi (phylum Neocallimastigomycota ): insights on its markers and phylogenetic resolution

The phylogenetic affiliations of anaerobic gut fungi (Neocallimastigomycota) are typically evaluated using single-gene markers. However, this approach often fails to resolve relationships between closely related lineages. To address this issue and identify alternative markers, we created a curated database comprising the complete ribosomal operon sequences of 156 isolates, representing 20 of the 22 recognized genera and two new genus-level clades. Using long-read sequencing, we obtained ~9 kbp operon sequences and developed a robust analysis pipeline. Incorporating both coding genes and non-coding regions (excluding IGS1) improved phylogenetic resolution. This phylogenetic approach successfully resolved the Cyllamyces and Caecomyces clades (hard-to-distinguish genetically), as well as seven analysed Piromyces species. We also scanned the operon for markers that are suitable for short-read sequencing platforms, with the aim of enhancing biodiversity and phylogenetic studies. Notably, the ETS1 genetic region also enabled the distinction between these lineages, indicating its phylogenetic value within the ribosomal operon. The resulting database is a valuable resource for expanding and strengthening phylogenetic frameworks.

High-throughput sequencing
Compare source metadata on this page

These are bibliographic comparisons, not experimental rankings. Follow the original document for methods and conditions.