CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Salipiger

genus of bacteria

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJul 16, 2025
Entity authorityQ7404724 ↗
Source-derived summary

Salipiger is a genus of bacteria in the family Rhodobacteraceae.

References

Further reading

Martinez-Canovas MJ; Quesada E; Martinez-Checa F; del Moral A; Bejar V (2004). "Salipiger mucescens gen. nov., sp. nov., a moderately halophilic, exopolysaccharide-producing bacterium isolated from hypersaline soil, belonging to the [alpha]-Proteobacteria". Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 54 (Pt 5): 1735–1740.

Editorial summary

“Salipiger” enters the record as genus of bacteria. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Salipiger, genus and bacteria can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewUseful for establishing the present vocabulary of the subject while preserving a route back to the evidence on which that vocabulary rests. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2004, 1735, 1740—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Salipiger, genus and bacteria.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Salipiger” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Salipiger, genus and bacteria provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 16, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q7404724. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2004, 1735 and 1740.

Critical limits

A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Salipiger”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Salipiger primary sources, Salipiger archive and Salipiger research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Salipiger”?
  2. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
  3. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Salipiger” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.