MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1853656151 · doi:10.1111/mec.13380

The genomics of wild yeast populations sheds light on the domestication of man's best (micro) friend

2015· letter· en· W1853656151 on OpenAlexaff
Chris Eberlein, Jean‐Baptiste Leducq, Christian R. Landry

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology · 2015
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFermentation and Sensory Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCégep Marie-VictorinUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomesticationBiologyGenomicsIdentification (biology)Adaptation (eye)Evolutionary biologyTree of life (biology)PhylogeneticsGenomeEcologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The domestication of plants, animals and microbes by humans are the longest artificial evolution experiments ever performed. The study of these long-term experiments can teach us about the genomics of adaptation through the identification of the genetic bases underlying the traits favoured by humans. In laboratory evolution, the characterization of the molecular changes that evolved specifically in some lineages is straightforward because the ancestors are readily available, for instance in the freezer. However, in the case of domesticated species, the ancestor is often missing, which leads to the necessity of going back to nature in order to infer the most likely ancestral state. Significant and relatively recent examples of this approach include wolves as the closest wild relative to domestic dogs (Axelsson et al. 2013) and teosinte as the closest relative to maize (reviewed in Hake & Ross-Ibarra 2015). In both cases, the joint analysis of domesticated lineages and their wild cousins has been key in reconstructing the molecular history of their domestication. While the identification of closest wild relatives has been done for many plants and animals, these comparisons represent challenges for micro-organisms. This has been the case for the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, whose natural ecological niche is particularly challenging to define. For centuries, this unicellular fungus has been the cellular factory for wine, beer and bread crafting, and currently for bioethanol and drug production. While the recent development of genomics has lead to the identification of many genetic elements associated with important wine characteristics, the historical origin of some of the domesticated wine strains has remained elusive due to the lack of knowledge of their close wild relatives. In this issue of Molecular Ecology, Almeida et al. (2015) identified what is to date the closest known wild population of the wine yeast. This population is found associated with oak trees in Europe, presumably its natural host. Using population genomics analyses, Almeida and colleagues discovered that the initial divergence between natural and domesticated wine yeasts in the Mediterranean region took place around the early days of wine production. Surprisingly, genomic regions that are key to wine production today appeared not to be derived from these natural populations but from genes gained from other yeast species.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular EcologySame topicFermentation and Sensory AnalysisFrench-language works237,207