MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944576509 · doi:10.1007/s00285-019-01465-x

Counting and sampling gene family evolutionary histories in the duplication-loss and duplication-loss-transfer models

2020· article· en· W2944576509 on OpenAlexafffund
Cédric Chauve, Yann Ponty, Michael Wallner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematical Biology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft und ForschungAustrian Science FundWestern Canada Research GridCompute Canada
KeywordsCoalescent theoryGene duplicationGene familyHorizontal gene transferBiologyPhylogenetic treePhylogenomicsTree (set theory)GeneEvolutionary biologyGeneticsMathematicsCombinatoricsGenome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given a set of species whose evolution is represented by a species tree, a gene family is a group of genes having evolved from a single ancestral gene. A gene family evolves along the branches of a species tree through various mechanisms, including-but not limited to-speciation ([Formula: see text]), gene duplication ([Formula: see text]), gene loss ([Formula: see text]), and horizontal gene transfer ([Formula: see text]). The reconstruction of a gene tree representing the evolution of a gene family constrained by a species tree is an important problem in phylogenomics. However, unlike in the multispecies coalescent evolutionary model that considers only speciation and incomplete lineage sorting events, very little is known about the search space for gene family histories accounting for gene duplication, gene loss and horizontal gene transfer (the [Formula: see text]-model). In this work, we introduce the notion of evolutionary histories defined as a binary ordered rooted tree describing the evolution of a gene family, constrained by a species tree in the [Formula: see text]-model. We provide formal grammars describing the set of all evolutionary histories that are compatible with a given species tree, whether it is ranked or unranked. These grammars allow us, using either analytic combinatorics or dynamic programming, to efficiently compute the number of histories of a given size, and also to generate random histories of a given size under the uniform distribution. We apply these tools to obtain exact asymptotics for the number of gene family histories for two species trees, the rooted caterpillar and complete binary tree, as well as estimates of the range of the exponential growth factor of the number of histories for random species trees of size up to 25. Our results show that including horizontal gene transfers induce a dramatic increase of the number of evolutionary histories. We also show that, within ranked species trees, the number of evolutionary histories in the [Formula: see text]-model is almost independent of the species tree topology. These results establish firm foundations for the development of ensemble methods for the prediction of reconciliations.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematical BiologySame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207