Phosphorylation network rewiring by gene duplication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Elucidating how complex regulatory networks have assembled during evolution requires a detailed understanding of the evolutionary dynamics that follow gene duplication events, including changes in post-translational modifications. We compared the phosphorylation profiles of paralogous proteins in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae to that of a species that diverged from the budding yeast before the duplication of those genes. We found that 100 million years of post-duplication divergence are sufficient for the majority of phosphorylation sites to be lost or gained in one paralog or the other, with a strong bias toward losses. However, some losses may be partly compensated for by the evolution of other phosphosites, as paralogous proteins tend to preserve similar numbers of phosphosites over time. We also found that up to 50% of kinase-substrate relationships may have been rewired during this period. Our results suggest that after gene duplication, proteins tend to subfunctionalize at the level of post-translational regulation and that even when phosphosites are preserved, there is a turnover of the kinases that phosphorylate them.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".