Lateral transfer at the gene and subgenic levels in the evolution of eukaryotic enolase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Enolase genes from land plants and apicomplexa (intracellular parasites, including the malarial parasite, Plasmodium) share two short insertions. This observation has led to the suggestion that the apicomplexan enolase is the product of a lateral transfer event involving the algal endosymbiont from which the apicomplexan plastid is derived. We have examined enolases from a wide variety of algae, as well as ciliates (close relatives of apicomplexa), to determine whether lateral transfer can account for the origin of the apicomplexan enolase. We find that lateral gene transfer, likely occurring intracellularly between endosymbiont and host nucleus, does account for the evolution of cryptomonad and chlorarachniophyte algal enolases but fails to explain the apicomplexan enolase. This failure is because the phylogenetic distribution of the insertions--which we find in apicomplexa, ciliates, land plants, and charophyte green algae--directly conflicts with the phylogeny of the gene itself. Protein insertions have traditionally been treated as reliable markers of evolutionary events; however, these enolase insertions do not seem to reflect accurately the evolutionary history of the molecule. The lack of congruence between insertions and phylogeny could be because of the parallel loss of both insertions in two or more lineages, or what is more likely, because the insertions were transmitted between distantly related genes by lateral transfer and fine-scale recombination, resulting in a mosaic gene. This latter process would be difficult to detect without such insertions to act as markers, and such mosaic genes could blur the "tree of life" beyond the extent to which whole-gene lateral transfer is already known to confound evolutionary reconstruction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".