Recombination of ecologically and evolutionarily significant loci maintains genetic cohesion in the <i>Pseudomonas syringae</i> species complex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Pseudomonas syringae is a highly diverse bacterial species complex capable of causing a wide range of serious diseases on numerous agronomically important crop species. Here, we examine the evolutionary relationships of 391 agricultural and environmental strains from the P. syringae species complex using whole-genome sequencing and evolutionary genomic analyses. Our collection includes strains from 11 of the 13 previously described phylogroups isolated off of over 90 hosts. We describe the phylogenetic distribution of all orthologous gene families in the P. syringae pan-genome, reconstruct the phylogeny of P. syringae using a core genome alignment and a hierarchical clustering analysis of pan-genome content, predict ecologically and evolutionary relevant loci, and establish the forces of molecular evolution operating on each gene family. We find that the common ancestor of the species complex likely carried a Rhizobium-like type III secretion system (TTSS) and later acquired the canonical TTSS. The phylogenetic analysis also showed that the species complex is subdivided into primary and secondary phylogroups based on genetic diversity and rates of genetic exchange. The primary phylogroups, which largely consist of agricultural isolates, are no more divergent than a number of other bacterial species, while the secondary phylogroups, which largely consists of environmental isolates, have levels of diversity more in line with multiple distinct species within a genus. An analysis of rates of recombination within and between phylogroups revealed a higher rate of recombination within primary phylogroups than between primary and secondary phylogroups. We also found that “ecologically significant” virulence-associated loci and “evolutionary significant” loci under positive selection are over-represented among loci that undergo inter-phylogroup genetic exchange. These results indicate that while inter-phylogroup recombination occurs relatively rarely in the species complex, it is an important force of genetic cohesion, particularly among the strains in the primary phylogroups. This level of genetic cohesion and the shared plant-associated niche argues for considering the primary phylogroups as a true biological species.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".