Parallel Independent Losses of G-Type Lysozyme Genes in Hairless Aquatic Mammals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lysozyme enzymes provide classic examples of molecular adaptation and parallel evolution, however, nearly all insights to date come from chicken-type (c-type) lysozymes. Goose-type (g-type) lysozymes occur in diverse vertebrates, with multiple independent duplications reported. Most mammals possess two g-type lysozyme genes (Lyg1 and Lyg2), the result of an early duplication, although some lineages are known to have subsequently lost one copy. Here we examine g-type lysozyme evolution across >250 mammals and reveal widespread losses of either Lyg1 or Lyg2 in several divergent taxa across the mammal tree of life. At the same time, we report strong evidence of extensive losses of both gene copies in cetaceans and sirenians, with an additional putative case of parallel loss in the tarsier. To validate these findings, we inspected published short-read data and confirmed the presence of loss of function mutations. Despite these losses, comparisons of selection pressures between intact g- and c-type lysozyme genes showed stronger purifying selection in the former, indicative of conserved function. Although the reasons for the evolutionary loss of g-type lysozymes in fully aquatic mammals are not known, we suggest that this is likely to at least partially relate to their hairlessness. Indeed, although Lyg1 does not show tissue-specific expression, recent studies have linked Lyg2 expression to anagen hair follicle development and hair loss. Such a role for g-type lysozyme would explain why the Lyg2 gene became obsolete when these taxa lost their body hair.
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) | 0.000 | 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".