MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2172167292 · doi:10.1139/g07-076

Ectopic gene conversions in bacterial genomes

2007· article· en· W2172167292 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Robert Morris, Guy Drouin

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyFirmicutesGeneticsPathogenic bacteriaGeneGenomeProteobacteriaMicrobiologyBacteria16S ribosomal RNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We characterized the gene conversions found between the duplicated genes of 75 bacterial genomes from five species groups (archaea, nonpathogenic and pathogenic firmicutes, and nonpathogenic and pathogenic proteobacteria). The number of gene conversions is positively correlated with the size of multigene families and the size of multigene families is not significantly different between pathogenic and nonpathogenic taxa. However, gene conversions occur twice as frequently in pathogenic species as in nonpathogenic species. Comparisons between closely related species also indicate a trend towards increased gene conversion in pathogenic species. Whereas the length of the conversions is positively correlated with flanking sequence similarity in all five groups, these correlations are smaller for pathogenic firmicutes and proteobacteria than for nonpathogenic firmicutes and proteobacteria. These results are consistent with our previous work on E. coli genomes and suggest that pathogenic bacteria allow recombination between more divergent gene sequences. This higher permissiveness is likely adaptive because it allows them to generate more genetic variability.

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
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations16
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome→Same topicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies→French-language works237,207→