Network Centrality Analysis in Fungi Reveals Complex Regulation of Lost and Gained Genes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gene gain and loss shape both proteomes and the networks they form. The increasing availability of closely related sequenced genomes and of genome-wide network data should enable a better understanding of the evolutionary forces driving gene gain, gene loss and evolutionary network rewiring. Using orthology mappings across 23 ascomycete fungi genomes, we identified proteins that were lost, gained or universally conserved across the tree, enabling us to compare genes across all stages of their life-cycle. Based on a collection of genome-wide network and gene expression datasets from baker's yeast, as well as a few from fission yeast, we found that gene loss is more strongly associated with network and expression features of closely related species than that of distant species, consistent with the evolutionary modulation of gene loss propensity through network rewiring. We also discovered that lost and gained genes, as compared to universally conserved "core" genes, have more regulators, more complex expression patterns and are much more likely to encode for transcription factors. Finally, we found that the relative rate of network integration of new genes into the different types of networks agrees with experimentally measured rates of network rewiring. This systems-level view of the life-cycle of eukaryotic genes suggests that the gain and loss of genes is tightly coupled to the gain and loss of network interactions, that lineage-specific adaptations drive regulatory complexity and that the relative rates of integration of new genes are consistent with network rewiring rates.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".