A model for the evolutionary dynamics of cross‐feeding polymorphisms in microorganisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Understanding mechanisms of evolutionary diversification is central to evolutionary biology. Microbes constitute promising model systems for observing processes of diversification directly in the laboratory. One of the main existing paradigms for microbial diversification is the evolution of cross‐feeding polymorphisms, in which a strain specializing on a primary resource coexists with a cross‐feeding strain that specializes on a waste product resulting from consumption of the primary resource. Here I propose a theoretical model for the evolutionary dynamics through which cross‐feeding polymorphisms can gradually emerge from a single ancestral strain. The model is based on the framework of adaptive dynamics, which has proved to be very useful for studying adaptive processes of divergence under sympatric conditions. In particular, the phenomenon of evolutionary branching serves as a general paradigm for diversification. I show that evolutionary branching naturally occurs in evolutionary models of cross‐feeding if (1) there is a trade‐off between uptake efficiencies on the primary and secondary resources, and (2) this trade‐off has positive curvature. The model also suggests that the evolution of cross‐feeding should be more likely in chemostat cultures than in serial batch cultures, which conforms with empirical observations. Overall, the model provides a theoretical metaphor for the evolution of cross‐feeding polymorphisms.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".