Experimental evolution of the grain of metabolic specialization in yeast
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adaptation to any given environment may be accompanied by a cost in terms of reduced growth in the ancestral or some alternative environment. Ecologists explain the cost of adaptation through the concept of a trade-off, by which gaining a new trait involves losing another trait. Two mechanisms have been invoked to explain the evolution of trade-offs in ecological systems, mutational degradation, and functional interference. Mutational degradation occurs when a gene coding a specific trait is not under selection in the resident environment; therefore, it may be degraded through the accumulation of mutations that are neutral in the resident environment but deleterious in an alternative environment. Functional interference evolves if the gene or a set of genes have antagonistic effects in two or more ecologically different traits. Both mechanisms pertain to a situation where the selection and the alternative environments are ecologically different. To test this hypothesis, we conducted an experiment in which 12 experimental populations of wild yeast were each grown in a minimal medium supplemented with a single substrate. We chose 12 different carbon substrates that were metabolized through similar and different pathways in order to represent a wide range of ecological conditions. We found no evidence for trade-offs between substrates on the same pathway. The indirect response of substrates on other pathways, however, was consistently negative, with little correlation between the direct and indirect responses. We conclude that the grain of specialization in this case is the metabolic pathway and that specialization appears to evolve through mutational degradation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".