Divergence in Fitness and Evolution of Drug Resistance in Experimental Populations of <i>Candida albicans</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dissemination and persistence of drug-resistant organisms in nature depends on the relative fitness of sensitive and resistant genotypes. While resistant genotypes are expected to be at an advantage compared to less resistant genotypes in the presence of drug, resistance may incur a cost; resistant genotypes may be at a disadvantage in the absence of drug. We measured the fitness of replicate experimental populations of the pathogenic yeast Candida albicans founded from a single progenitor cell in a previous study (L. E. Cowen, D. Sanglard, D. Calabrese, C. Sirjusingh, J. B. Anderson, and L. M. Kohn, J. Bacteriol. 182:1515-1522, 2000) and evolved in the presence, and in the absence, of the antifungal agent fluconazole. Fitness was measured both in the presence and in the absence of fluconazole by placing each evolved population in direct competition with the drug-sensitive ancestor and measuring the reproductive output of each competitor in the mixture. Populations evolved in the presence of drug diverged in fitness. Any significant cost of resistance, indicated by reduced fitness in the absence of drug, was eliminated with further evolution. Populations evolved in the absence of drug showed more uniform increases in fitness under both conditions. Fitness in the competition assays was not predicted by measurements of the MICs, doubling times, or stationary-phase cell densities of the competitors in isolation, suggesting the importance of interactions between mixed genotypes in competitions.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".