Ploidy tug-of-war: evolutionary and genetic environments influence the rate of ploidy drive in a human fungal pathogen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Variation in baseline ploidy is seen throughout the tree of life, yet the factors that determine why one ploidy level is selected over another remain poorly understood. Experimental evolution studies using asexual fungal microbes with manipulated ploidy levels intriguingly reveals a propensity to return to the historical baseline ploidy, a phenomenon that we term ‘ploidy drive’. We evolved haploid, diploid, and polyploid strains of the human fungal pathogen Candida albicans under three different nutrient limitation environments to test whether these conditions, hypothesized to select for low ploidy levels, could counteract ploidy drive. Strains generally maintained or acquired smaller genome sizes in minimal medium and under phosphorus depletion compared to in a complete medium, while mostly maintained or acquired increased genome sizes under nitrogen depletion. Surprisingly, improvements in fitness often ran counter to changes in total nuclear genome size; in a number of scenarios lines that maintained their original genome size often increased in fitness more than lines that converged towards diploidy. Combined, this work demonstrates a role for both the environment and genotype in determination of the rate of ploidy drive, and highlights questions that remain about the force(s) that cause genome size variation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".