Recombination in Thermotoga: Implications for Species Concepts and Biogeography
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Here we characterize regions of the genomes of eight members of the hyperthermophilic genus Thermotoga. These bacteria differ from each other physiologically and by 3-20% in gene content and occupy physically distinct environments in widely disparate regions of the globe. Among the four different lineages (represented by nine different strains) that we compare, no two are closer than 96% in the average sequences of their genes. By most accepted recent definitions these are different "ecotypes" and different "species." And yet we find compelling evidence for recombination between them. We suggest that no single prokaryotic species concept can accommodate such uncoupling of ecotypic and genetic aspects of cohesion and diversity, and that without a single concept, the question of whether or not prokaryotic species might in general be cosmopolitan cannot be sensibly addressed. We can, however, recast biogeographical questions in terms of the distribution of genes and their alleles.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it