Seems complicated, and I don't see any evidence for this?

Finally, these Neurospora results build on similar results some of the authors demonstrated recently in two plant pathogenic fungi. Since these pathogens are less studied than Neurospora, we have do some experiments before a more formal response. But one is coming! www.science.org/doi/full/10....

Finally, there are many, many studies that show conidia having multiple alleles, so they must be composed of different genetic nuclei (heterokaryotic). This has been shown both with mutants, as well as directly observed with fluorescence.
doi.org/10.1093/gene...

Likewise, the classic experiments of Beadle and Tatum required extensive methods to isolate their mutations in a homokaryotic (pure nuclear) state. You cannot simply mutagenise Neurospora spores to get auxotrophs, something that is routinely in mononuclear haploid fungi like Aspergillus

Bit longer version: The claim of a haploid, but mononuclear spore does not match with the extraordinarily common occurrence of transformation. Heterokaryons are commonly recovered, which would not be possible if they were truly haploid

www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...

I periodically rewatch this clip. How he uses jargon, but explains it each time. Particularly his focus on HOW the evidence leads to a conclusion. Seems to give a good model for science, that it is the interpretation that matters, not the "evidence". youtu.be/G8cbIWMv0rI?...

But... High school teacher is actually accurate??

Have you considered posting this on something like PubPeer? A bit more permanent/searchable than Bleusky

I guess there is *some* value for people who cannot easily ask colleagues, for example in a country with underdeveloped science. Sort of like how ChatGPY is helpful for grammar and stuff. Of course there is the problem that this not a real colleague, and so it makes a middle-of-the road paper.