The role of laterally transferred genes in adaptive evolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bacterial genomes develop new mechanisms to tide them over the imposing conditions they encounter during the course of their evolution. Acquisition of new genes by lateral gene transfer may be one of the dominant ways of adaptation in bacterial genome evolution. Lateral gene transfer provides the bacterial genome with a new set of genes that help it to explore and adapt to new ecological niches. METHODS: A maximum likelihood analysis was done on the five sequenced corynebacterial genomes to model the rates of gene insertions/deletions at various depths of the phylogeny. RESULTS: The study shows that most of the laterally acquired genes are transient and the inferred rates of gene movement are higher on the external branches of the phylogeny and decrease as the phylogenetic depth increases. The newly acquired genes are under relaxed selection and evolve faster than their older counterparts. Analysis of some of the functionally characterised LGTs in each species has indicated that they may have a possible adaptive role. CONCLUSION: The five Corynebacterial genomes sequenced to date have evolved by acquiring between 8-14% of their genomes by LGT and some of these genes may have a role in adaptation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".