Inferring and Validating Horizontal Gene Transfer Events Using Bipartition Dissimilarity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Horizontal gene transfer (HGT) is one of the main mechanisms driving the evolution of microorganisms. Its accurate identification is one of the major challenges posed by reticulate evolution. In this article, we describe a new polynomial-time algorithm for inferring HGT events and compare 3 existing and 1 new tree comparison indices in the context of HGT identification. The proposed algorithm can rely on different optimization criteria, including least squares (LS), Robinson and Foulds (RF) distance, quartet distance (QD), and bipartition dissimilarity (BD), when searching for an optimal scenario of subtree prune and regraft (SPR) moves needed to transform the given species tree into the given gene tree. As the simulation results suggest, the algorithmic strategy based on BD, introduced in this article, generally provides better results than those based on LS, RF, and QD. The BD-based algorithm also proved to be more accurate and faster than a well-known polynomial time heuristic RIATA-HGT. Moreover, the HGT recovery results yielded by BD were generally equivalent to those provided by the exponential-time algorithm LatTrans, but a clear gain in running time was obtained using the new algorithm. Finally, a statistical framework for assessing the reliability of obtained HGTs by bootstrap analysis is also presented.
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 | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".