MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100733246 · doi:10.1080/10635150802559265

The Impact of Reticulate Evolution on Genome Phylogeny

2008· article· en· W2100733246 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert G. Beiko, W. Ford Doolittle, Robert L. Charlebois

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Biology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsAtlantic School of TheologyDalhousie University
FundersGenome Canada
KeywordsBiologyGenomePhylogenetic treeEvolutionary biologyPhylogeneticsTree (set theory)Tree of life (biology)ReticulateHorizontal gene transferReticulate evolutionSet (abstract data type)Genome evolutionGeneticsGenePaleontologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genome phylogenies are used to build tree-like representations of evolutionary relationships among genomes. However, in condensing the phylogenetic signals within a set of genomes down to a single tree, these methods generally do not explicitly take into account discordant signals arising due to lateral genetic transfer. Because conflicting vertical and horizontal signals can produce compromise trees that do not reflect either type of history, it is essential to understand the sensitivity of inferred genome phylogenies to these confounding effects. Using replicated simulations of genome evolution, we show that different scenarios of lateral genetic transfer have significant impacts on the ability to recover the "true" tree of genomes, even when corrections for phylogenetically discordant signals are used.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.108
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.108
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations51
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic BiologySame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207