MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3105671887 · doi:10.1101/2020.02.01.930370

Extreme Genomic Makeover: Evolutionary History of Maternally-transmitted Clam Symbionts

2020· preprint· en· W3105671887 on OpenAlexaff
Maëva Perez, Corinna Breusing, Bernard Angers, YJ Won, C. Robert Young

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influences
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenomeBiologyHorizontal gene transferEvolutionary biologyGenome evolutionPhylogenomicsPhylogeneticsGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Given their recent switch to a vertically-transmitted intracellular lifestyle, the chemosynthetic bacteria associated with deep-sea vesicomyid clams are an excellent model system to study the processes underlying reductive genome evolution. In this study, we provide the first estimates of the relative contributions of drift, recombination and selection in shaping the ongoing reductive genome evolution in these symbionts. To do so, we compared the genomes of endosymbionts associated with 11 vesicomyid clam species to that of closely related free-living bacteria and their respective hosts’ mitochondria. Our investigation confirmed that neutral evolutionary processes were the dominant driver of reductive genome evolution in this group and highlighted the important role of horizontal gene transfer in mitigating genome erosion. Finally, a genome-wide screen for episodic positive selection across the symbiont phylogeny revealed the pervasive role of selective processes in maintaining symbiont functional integrity.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influencesFrench-language works237,207