MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Genome evolution in Microsporidia

2005· article· en· W2011073346 on OpenAlexaff
Claudio H. Slamovits, Patrick J. Keeling

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eukaryotic Microbiology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasitic Infections and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyMicrosporidiaGenomeEvolutionary biologyPhylogeneticsGeneticsFlagellumGenePhylogenetic treeMitochondrial DNAComputational biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microsporidia are eukaryotic intracellular parasites that evolved from fungi. However, they are highly derived and specialized, and lack several typical eukaryotic features, such as canonical mitochondria, flagella and peroxisomes. They also exhibit seemingly “primitive” traits, probably due to their extreme sequence divergence and reductive evolution, which long obscured their true phylogenetic affinity. Gene content and genomic architecture in Microsporidia are known from E. cuniculi, the only species whose complete genome has been sequenced. A genomic sequence survey of A. locustae, a second and distantly related species, carried out in our laboratory provided valuable data for many studies that improved our knowledge on the biology and evolution of Microsporidia. We present here the latest results of our survey, emphasizing comparative analyses between A. locustae and E. cuniculi in order to explore the dynamics of genome evolution and compaction in this intriguing group of parasites. We found that, in spite of their extreme rates of sequence evolution, microsporidian genome structure evolves slowly compared to other eukaryotic groups and we propose that it is a consequence of compaction. We also report the discovery and characterization of a photolyase in A. locustae that protects the spore from DNA damage. In addition, comparative analysis allows the identification of several important genes that would otherwise not be recognised due to the extreme level of sequence evolution. Finally, we compared intergenic DNA between both species aiming to understand the structure of regulatory sequences in these highly compacted genomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Eukaryotic MicrobiologySame topicParasitic Infections and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207