MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036039277 · doi:10.1093/molbev/msaa151

Consequences of Stability-Induced Epistasis for Substitution Rates

2020· article· en· W3036039277 on OpenAlexaff
Noor Youssef, Edward Susko, Joseph P. Bielawski

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology and Evolution · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpistasisBiologyStability (learning theory)Selection (genetic algorithm)InferenceEvolutionary biologyMolecular evolutionSubstitution (logic)MutationGeneticsComputer scienceGeneArtificial intelligencePhylogeneticsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Do interactions between residues in a protein (i.e., epistasis) significantly alter evolutionary dynamics? If so, what consequences might they have on inference from traditional codon substitution models which assume site-independence for the sake of computational tractability? To investigate the effects of epistasis on substitution rates, we employed a mechanistic mutation-selection model in conjunction with a fitness framework derived from protein stability. We refer to this as the stability-informed site-dependent (S-SD) model and developed a new stability-informed site-independent (S-SI) model that captures the average effect of stability constraints on individual sites of a protein. Comparison of S-SI and S-SD offers a novel and direct method for investigating the consequences of stability-induced epistasis on protein evolution. We developed S-SI and S-SD models for three natural proteins and showed that they generate sequences consistent with real alignments. Our analyses revealed that epistasis tends to increase substitution rates compared with the rates under site-independent evolution. We then assessed the epistatic sensitivity of individual site and discovered a counterintuitive effect: Highly connected sites were less influenced by epistasis relative to exposed sites. Lastly, we show that, despite the unrealistic assumptions, traditional models perform comparably well in the presence and absence of epistasis and provide reasonable summaries of average selection intensities. We conclude that epistatic models are critical to understanding protein evolutionary dynamics, but epistasis might not be required for reasonable inference of selection pressure when averaging over time and sites.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology and EvolutionSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207