Serine Codon-Usage Bias in Deep Phylogenomics: Pancrustacean Relationships as a Case Study
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
Phylogenomic analyses of ancient relationships are usually performed using amino acid data, but it is unclear whether amino acids or nucleotides should be preferred. With the 2-fold aim of addressing this problem and clarifying pancrustacean relationships, we explored the signals in the 62 protein-coding genes carefully assembled by Regier et al. in 2010. With reference to the pancrustaceans, this data set infers a highly supported nucleotide tree that is substantially different to the corresponding, but poorly supported, amino acid one. We show that the discrepancy between the nucleotide-based and the amino acids-based trees is caused by substitutions within synonymous codon families (especially those of serine-TCN and AGY). We show that different arthropod lineages are differentially biased in their usage of serine, arginine, and leucine synonymous codons, and that the serine bias is correlated with the topology derived from the nucleotides, but not the amino acids. We suggest that a parallel, partially compositionally driven, synonymous codon-usage bias affects the nucleotide topology. As substitutions between serine codon families can proceed through threonine or cysteine intermediates, amino acid data sets might also be affected by the serine codon-usage bias. We suggest that a Dayhoff recoding strategy would partially ameliorate the effects of such bias. Although amino acids provide an alternative hypothesis of pancrustacean relationships, neither the nucleotides nor the amino acids version of this data set seems to bring enough genuine phylogenetic information to robustly resolve the relationships within group, which should still be considered unresolved.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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