MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168037097 · doi:10.1093/molbev/msp048

Evolution of the Caenorhabditis elegans Genome

2009· review· en· W2168037097 on OpenAlexaff
Asher D. Cutter, Apurba Dey, Royce Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology and Evolution · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyCaenorhabditis elegansGenomeCaenorhabditisEvolutionary biologyGeneticsPopulationHermaphroditeGenome evolutionGenomicsComputational biologyGeneZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A fundamental problem in genome biology is to elucidate the evolutionary forces responsible for generating nonrandom patterns of genome organization. As the first metazoan to benefit from full-genome sequencing, Caenorhabditis elegans has been at the forefront of research in this area. Studies of genomic patterns, and their evolutionary underpinnings, continue to be augmented by the recent push to obtain additional full-genome sequences of related Caenorhabditis taxa. In the near future, we expect to see major advances with the onset of whole-genome resequencing of multiple wild individuals of the same species. In this review, we synthesize many of the important insights to date in our understanding of genome organization and function that derive from the evolutionary principles made explicit by theoretical population genetics and molecular evolution and highlight fertile areas for future research on unanswered questions in C. elegans genome evolution. We call attention to the need for C. elegans researchers to generate and critically assess nonadaptive hypotheses for genomic and developmental patterns, in addition to adaptive scenarios. We also emphasize the potential importance of evolution in the gonochoristic (female and male) ancestors of the androdioecious (hermaphrodite and male) C. elegans as the source for many of its genomic and developmental patterns.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.252 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations134
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology and EvolutionSame topicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model OrganismsFrench-language works237,207