MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evolutionary genomics of human intellectual disability

2009· article· en· W2146944559 on OpenAlexafffund
Bernard J. Crespi, Kyle Summers, Steve Dorus

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolutionary Applications · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of HealthCanada Council for the Arts
KeywordsBiologyIntellectual disabilityGeneGeneticsPhenotypeSelection (genetic algorithm)Evolutionary biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous studies have postulated that X-linked and autosomal genes underlying human intellectual disability may have also mediated the evolution of human cognition. We have conducted the first comprehensive assessment of the extent and patterns of positive Darwinian selection on intellectual disability genes in humans. We report three main findings. First, as noted in some previous reports, intellectual disability genes with primary functions in the central nervous system exhibit a significant concentration to the X chromosome. Second, there was no evidence for a higher incidence of recent positive selection on X-linked than autosomal intellectual disability genes, nor was there a higher incidence of selection on such genes overall, compared to sets of control genes. However, the X-linked intellectual disability genes inferred to be subject to recent positive selection were concentrated in the Rho GTP-ase pathway, a key signaling pathway in neural development and function. Third, among all intellectual disability genes, there was evidence for a higher incidence of recent positive selection on genes involved in DNA repair, but not for genes involved in other functions. These results provide evidence that alterations to genes in the Rho GTP-ase and DNA-repair pathways may play especially-important roles in the evolution of human cognition and vulnerability to genetically-based intellectual disability.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionary ApplicationsSame topicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207