MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115948983 · doi:10.1155/2012/958164

Positive Selection and the Evolution of<i>izumo</i>Genes in Mammals

2012· article· en· W2115948983 on OpenAlexafffund
Phil Grayson, Alberto Civetta

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Evolutionary Biology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSperm and Testicular Function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologySexual selectionSelection (genetic algorithm)GeneSperm competitionEvolutionary biologyPositive selectionSpermGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most genes linked to male reproductive function have been known to evolve rapidly among species and to show signatures of positive selection. Different male species-specific reproductive strategies have been proposed to underlie positive selection, such as sperm competitive advantage and control over females postmating physiology. However, an underexplored aspect potentially affecting male reproductive gene evolution in mammals is the effect of gene duplications. Here we analyze the molecular evolution of members of the izumo gene family in mammals, a family of four genes mostly expressed in the sperm with known and potential roles in sperm-egg fusion. We confirm a previously reported bout of selection for izumo1 and establish that the bout of selection is restricted to the diversification of species of the superorder Laurasiatheria. None of the izumo genes showed evidence of positive selection in Glires (Rodentia and Lagomorpha), and in the case of the non-testes-specific izumo4, rapid evolution was driven by relaxed selection. We detected evidence of positive selection for izumo3 among Primates. Interestingly, positively selected sites include several serine residues suggesting modifications in protein function and/or localization among Primates. Our results suggest that positive selection is driven by aspects related to species-specific adaptations to fertilization rather than sexual selection.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations33
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Evolutionary BiologySame topicSperm and Testicular FunctionFrench-language works237,207