MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3140278059 · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2021.613450

Experimental Evolution of Interference Competition

2021· article· en· W3140278059 on OpenAlexafffund
Florien A. Gorter, Carolina Tabares-Mafla, Rees Kassen, Sijmen E. Schoustra

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Microbiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersFP7 People: Marie-Curie ActionsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaETH Zürich FoundationEuropean Molecular Biology OrganizationOntario Ministry of Economic Development and InnovationSimons Foundation
KeywordsAntagonismBiologyCompetition (biology)Experimental evolutionPseudomonas aeruginosaEvolutionary biologyInterference (communication)Strain (injury)EcologyGeneticsBacteriaGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The importance of interference competition, where individuals compete through antagonistic traits such as the production of toxins, has long been recognized by ecologists, yet understanding how these types of interactions evolve remains limited. Toxin production is thought to be beneficial when competing with a competitor. Here, we explore if antagonism can evolve by long-term selection of the toxin (pyocin) producing strain Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1 in the presence (or absence) of one of three clinical isolates of the same species ( Recipient ) over ten serial transfers. We find that inhibition decreases in the absence of a recipient. In the presence of a recipient, antagonism evolved to be different depending on the recipient used. Our study shows that the evolution of interference competition by toxins can decrease or increase, experimentally demonstrating the importance of this type of interaction for the evolution of species interactions.

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 score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MicrobiologySame topicEvolutionary Game Theory and CooperationFrench-language works237,207