Comparative genomics of microsporidia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Microsporidia have been known for some time to possess among the smallest genomes of any eukaryote. There is now a completely sequenced microsporidian genome, as well as several other large-scale sequencing efforts, so the nature of these genomes is becoming apparent. This paper reviews some of the characteristics of microsporidian genomes in general, and some of the recent discoveries made through comparative genomic analyses. In general, microsporidian genomes are both reduced and compacted. Reduction takes place through gene loss, which is understandable in obligate intracellular parasites that rely on their host for many metabolites. Compaction is a more complex process, and is as yet not fully understood. It is clear from genomes surveyed thus far that the remaining genes are tightly packed and that there is little non-coding sequence, resulting in some extraordinary arrangements, including overlapping genes. Compaction also seems to affect certain aspects of genome evolution, like the frequency of rearrangements. The force behind this compaction is not known, and is especially interesting in light of the fact that surveys of genomes that are significantly different in size yield similar complements of protein-coding genes. There are some interesting exceptions, including catalase, photolyase and some mitochondrial proteins, but the rarity of these raises an interesting question as to what accounts for the significant differences seen in the genome sizes among microsporidia.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".