MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mammalian Sperm Proteins Are Rapidly Evolving: Evidence of Positive Selection in Functionally Diverse Genes

2002· article· en· W2135645309 on OpenAlexafffund
Dara G. Torgerson, Rob J. Kulathinal, Rama S. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology and Evolution · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyPositive selectionGeneSelection (genetic algorithm)Evolutionary biologySpermGeneticsComputational biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A growing number of genes involved in sex and reproduction have been demonstrated to be rapidly evolving. Here, we show that genes expressed solely in spermatozoa represent a highly diverged subset among mouse and human tissue-specific orthologs. The average rate of nonsynonymous substitutions per site (K(a)) is significantly higher in sperm proteins (mean K(a) = 0.18; N = 35) than in proteins expressed specifically in all other tissues (mean K(a) = 0.074; N = 473). No differences, however, are found in the synonymous substitution rate (K(s)) between tissues, suggesting that selective forces, and not mutation rate, explain the high rate of replacement substitutions in sperm proteins. Four out of 19 sperm-specific genes with characterized function demonstrated evidence of strong positive Darwinian selection, including a protein involved in gene regulation, Protamine-1 (PRM1), a protein involved in glycolysis, GAPDS, and two egg-binding proteins, Adam-2 precursor (ADAM2) and sperm-adhesion molecule-1 (SAM1). These results demonstrate the rapid evolution of sperm-specific genes and highlight the molecular action of sexual selection on a variety of characters involved in mammalian sperm function.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations238
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology and EvolutionSame topicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207