Author response: A single clonal lineage of transmissible cancer identified in two marine mussel species in South America and Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cancer cells can grow and spread in one individual, but they normally do not spread to others. There are a few exceptions to this rule. For example, there are cancers in Tasmanian devils, dogs and bivalve shellfish that can spread to other members of the same species. In these creatures, cancer from one individual evolved the ability to spread throughout the population. These cancer cells infect animals like a pathogen. A fatal cancer called disseminated neoplasia affects many species of bivalves. In four bivalve species, including the marine mussel Mytilus trossulus, scientists have shown that the cancer can spread from one individual to another. This transmissible cancer has been found in M. trossulus mussels in British Columbia, Canada; but related species of mussels in other parts of the world also develop disseminated neoplasia. It is possible these other cancers are transmissible and have spread from one population of mussels to another. Yonemitsu et al. performed genetic analyses to show that cancers found in two other mussel species – Mytilus chilensis in South America and Mytilus edulis in Europe – are transmissible and arose in M. trossulus. The cancers in the South American and European mussels were nearly identical genetically, which suggests that they came from a single M. trossulus mussel with cancer at some point in the past. Somehow cancer cells spread between the Northern and the Southern Hemispheres and across the Atlantic Ocean, infecting multiple species across the world. The analyses also show that this cancer lineage is different from the one previously identified in British Columbia. These analyses show that bivalve transmissible neoplasia was able to spread worldwide, most likely through accidental transport of infected mussels on international shipping vessels. This suggests that human activities unwittingly introduced the disease to new areas. Learning more about transmissible cancers may help scientists understand how cancers evolve with their hosts in extreme situations.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".