MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170645178 · doi:10.1093/molbev/msi065

Impact of Taxon Sampling on the Estimation of Rates of Evolution at Sites

2004· article· en· W2170645178 on OpenAlexafffund
Christian Blouin, Davin Butt, Andrew J. Roger

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology and Evolution · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGenome Atlantic
KeywordsBiologyTaxonEvolutionary biologySampling (signal processing)EstimationEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The function of individual sites within a protein influences their rate of accepted point mutation. During the computation of phylogenetic likelihoods, rate heterogeneity can be modeled on a site-per-site basis with relative rates drawn from a discretized Gamma-distribution. Site-rate estimates (e.g., the rate of highest posterior probability given the data at a site) can then be used as a measure of evolutionary constraints imposed by function. However, if the sequence availability is limited, the estimation of rates is subject to sampling error. This article presents a simulation study that evaluates the robustness of evolutionary site-rate estimates for both small and phylogenetically unbalanced samples. The sampling error on rate estimates was first evaluated for alignments that included 5-45 sequences, sampled by jackknifing, from a master alignment containing 968 sequences. We observed that the potentially enhanced resolution among site rates due to the inclusion of a larger number of rate categories is negated by the difficulty in correctly estimating intermediate rates. This effect is marked for data sets with less than 30 sequences. Although the computation of likelihood theoretically accounts for phylogenetic distances through branch lengths, the introduction of a single long-branch outlier sequence had a significant negative effect on site-rate estimates. Finally, the presence of a shift in rates of evolution between related lineages can be diagnostic of a gain/loss of function within a protein family. Our analyses indicate that detecting these rate shifts is a harder problem than estimating rates. This is so, partially, because the difference in rates depends on two rate estimates, each with an intrinsic uncertainty. The performances of four methods to detect these site-rate shifts are evaluated and compared. Guidelines are suggested for preparing data sets minimally influenced by error introduced by sequence sampling.

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)0.086
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.271
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0860.271
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
DomainMethods
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

Citations31
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology and EvolutionSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207