Microevolution of the Direct Repeat Region of <i>Mycobacterium tuberculosis</i> : Implications for Interpretation of Spoligotyping Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The direct repeat (DR) region has been determined to be an important chromosomal domain for studying the evolution of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Despite this, very little is known about microevolutionary events associated with clonal expansion and how such events influence the interpretation of both restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) and spoligotype data. This study examined the structure of the DR region in three independently evolving lineages of M. tuberculosis with a combination of DR-RFLP, spoligotyping, and partial DNA sequencing. The results show that the duplication of direct variable repeat (DVR) sequences and single-nucleotide polymorphisms is rare; conversely, the deletion of DVR sequences and IS6110-mediated mutation is observed frequently. Deletion of either single or contiguous DVR sequences was observed. The deletion of adjacent DVR sequences occurred in a dependent manner rather than as an accumulation of independent events. Insertion of IS6110 into either the direct repeat or spacer sequences influenced the spoligotype pattern, resulting in apparent deletion of DVR sequences. Homologous recombination between adjacent IS6110 elements led to extensive deletion in the DR region, again demonstrating a dependent evolutionary mechanism. Different isolates from the same strain family and isolates from different strain families were observed to converge to the same spoligotype pattern. In conclusion, the binary data of the spoligotype are unable to provide sufficient information to accurately establish genotypic relationships between certain clinical isolates of M. tuberculosis. This has important implications for molecular epidemiologic strain tracking and for the application of spoligotype data to phylogenetic analysis of M. tuberculosis isolates.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".