Phylogenetic Clustering of Genes Reveals Shared Evolutionary Trajectories and Putative Gene Functions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Homologous genes in prokaryotes can be described using phylogenetic profiles which summarize their patterns of presence or absence across a set of genomes. Phylogenetic profiles have been used for nearly twenty years to cluster genes based on measures such as the Euclidean distance between profile vectors. However, most approaches do not take into account the phylogenetic relationships amongst the profiled genomes, and overrepresentation of certain taxonomic groups (i.e., pathogenic species with many sequenced representatives) can skew the interpretation of profiles. We propose a new approach that uses a coevolutionary method defined by Pagel to account for the phylogenetic relationships amongst target organisms, and a hierarchical-clustering approach to define sets of genes with common distributions across the organisms. The clusters we obtain using our method show greater evidence of phylogenetic and functional clustering than a recently published approach based on hidden Markov models. Our clustering method identifies sets of amino-acid biosynthesis genes that constitute cohesive pathways, and motility/chemotaxis genes with common histories of descent and lateral gene transfer.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".