MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2238477779 · doi:10.1111/evo.12854

The Red Queen lives: Epistasis between linked resistance loci

2016· article· en· W2238477779 on OpenAlexaff
César Metzger, Pepijn Luijckx, Gilberto Bento, Mahendra Mariadassou, Dieter Ebert

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungFreiwillige Akademische Gesellschaft
KeywordsBiologyEpistasisQueen (butterfly)Evolutionary biologyGeneticsResistance (ecology)ZoologyGeneEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A popular theory explaining the maintenance of genetic recombination (sex) is the Red Queen Theory. This theory revolves around the idea that time-lagged negative frequency-dependent selection by parasites favors rare host genotypes generated through recombination. Although the Red Queen has been studied for decades, one of its key assumptions has remained unsupported. The signature host-parasite specificity underlying the Red Queen, where infection depends on a match between host and parasite genotypes, relies on epistasis between linked resistance loci for which no empirical evidence exists. We performed 13 genetic crosses and tested over 7000 Daphnia magna genotypes for resistance to two strains of the bacterial pathogen Pasteuria ramosa. Results reveal the presence of strong epistasis between three closely linked resistance loci. One locus masks the expression of the other two, while these two interact to produce a single resistance phenotype. Changing a single allele on one of these interacting loci can reverse resistance against the tested parasites. Such a genetic mechanism is consistent with host and parasite specificity assumed by the Red Queen Theory. These results thus provide evidence for a fundamental assumption of this theory and provide a genetic basis for understanding the Red Queen dynamics in the Daphnia-Pasteuria system.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 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

Citations39
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionSame topicPlant Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207