Bacterial Genomes: Habitat Specificity and Uncharted Organisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The capability and speed in generating genomic data have increased profoundly since the release of the draft human genome in 2000. Additionally, sequencing costs have continued to plummet as the next generation of highly efficient sequencing technologies (next-generation sequencing) became available and commercial facilities promote market competition. However, new challenges have emerged as researchers attempt to efficiently process the massive amounts of sequence data being generated. First, the described genome sequences are unequally distributed among the branches of bacterial life and, second, bacterial pan-genomes are often not considered when setting aims for sequencing projects. Here, we propose that scientists should be concerned with attaining an improved equal representation of most of the bacterial tree of life organisms, at the genomic level. Moreover, they should take into account the natural variation that is often observed within bacterial species and the role of the often changing surrounding environment and natural selection pressures, which is central to bacterial speciation and genome evolution. Not only will such efforts contribute to our overall understanding of the microbial diversity extant in ecosystems as well as the structuring of the extant genomes, but they will also facilitate the development of better methods for (meta)genome annotation.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".