MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Molecular Evolution of Xenobiotic Metabolism and Resistance in Chelicerate Mites

2016· review· en· W2300141009 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Thomas Van Leeuwen, Wannes Dermauw

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Entomology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBijzonder Onderzoeksfonds UGentVlaamse regeringFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekGenome CanadaOntario GenomicsOntario Genomics Institute
KeywordsBiologyXenobioticGeneGene familyGeneticsMiteGenomeLineage (genetic)Evolutionary biologyEcologyBiochemistryEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chelicerate mites diverged from other arthropod lineages more than 400 million years ago and subsequently developed specific and remarkable xenobiotic adaptations. The study of the two-spotted spider mite, Tetranychus urticae, for which a high-quality Sanger-sequenced genome was first available, revealed expansions and radiations in all major detoxification gene families, including P450 monooxygenases, carboxyl/cholinesterases, glutathione-S-transferases, and ATP-binding cassette transporters. Novel gene families that are not well studied in other arthropods, such as major facilitator family transporters and lipocalins, also reflect the evolution of xenobiotic adaptation. The acquisition of genes by horizontal gene transfer provided new routes to handle toxins, for example, the β-cyanoalanine synthase enzyme that metabolizes cyanide. The availability of genomic resources for other mite species has allowed researchers to study the lineage specificity of these gene family expansions and the distinct evolution of genes involved in xenobiotic metabolism in mites. Genome-based tools have been crucial in supporting the idiosyncrasies of mite detoxification and will further support the expanding field of mite-plant interactions.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 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

Citations296
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of EntomologySame topicInsect-Plant Interactions and ControlFrench-language works237,207