Evidence That Plant-Like Genes in <i>Chlamydia</i> Species Reflect an Ancestral Relationship between Chlamydiaceae, Cyanobacteria, and the Chloroplast
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An unusually high proportion of proteins encoded in Chlamydia genomes are most similar to plant proteins, leading to proposals that a Chlamydia ancestor obtained genes from a plant or plant-like host organism by horizontal gene transfer. However, during an analysis of bacterial-eukaryotic protein similarities, we found that the vast majority of plant-like sequences in Chlamydia are most similar to plant proteins that are targeted to the chloroplast, an organelle derived from a cyanobacterium. We present further evidence suggesting that plant-like genes in Chlamydia, and other Chlamydiaceae, are likely a reflection of an unappreciated evolutionary relationship between the Chlamydiaceae and the cyanobacteria-chloroplast lineage. Further analyses of bacterial and eukaryotic genomes indicates the importance of evaluating organellar ancestry of eukaryotic proteins when identifying bacteria-eukaryote homologs or horizontal gene transfer and supports the proposal that Chlamydiaceae, which are obligate intracellular bacterial pathogens of animals, are not likely exchanging DNA with their hosts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".