MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562024645 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2016.2272

Size evolution in microorganisms masks trade-offs predicted by the growth rate hypothesis

2016· article· en· W2562024645 on OpenAlexafffund
Isabelle Gounand, Tanguy Daufresne, Dominique Gravel, Corinne Bouvier, Thierry Bouvier, Marine Combe, Claire Gougat‐Barbera, Franck Poly, Clara Torres‐Barceló, Nicolas Mouquet

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
FundersCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsBiologyGrowth rateAdaptation (eye)NutrientPhosphorusTrade-offMicroorganismEcologyBacteriaGeneticsChemistryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adaptation to local resource availability depends on responses in growth rate and nutrient acquisition. The growth rate hypothesis (GRH) suggests that growing fast should impair competitive abilities for phosphorus and nitrogen due to high demand for biosynthesis. However, in microorganisms, size influences both growth and uptake rates, which may mask trade-offs and instead generate a positive relationship between these traits (size hypothesis, SH). Here, we evolved a gradient of maximum growth rate (μmax) from a single bacterium ancestor to test the relationship amongμmax, competitive ability for nutrients and cell size, while controlling for evolutionary history. We found a strong positive correlation betweenμmaxand competitive ability for phosphorus, associated with a trade-off betweenμmaxand cell size: strains selected for highμmaxwere smaller and better competitors for phosphorus. Our results strongly support the SH, while the trade-offs expected under GRH were not apparent. Beyond plasticity, unicellular populations can respond rapidly to selection pressure through joint evolution of their size and maximum growth rate. Our study stresses that physiological links between these traits tightly shape the evolution of competitive strategies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations14
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207