Why are rhizobial symbiosis genes mobile?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rhizobia are one of the most important and best studied groups of bacterial symbionts. They are defined by their ability to establish nitrogen-fixing intracellular infections within plant hosts. One surprising feature of this symbiosis is that the bacterial genes required for this complex trait are not fixed within the chromosome, but are encoded on mobile genetic elements (MGEs), namely plasmids or integrative and conjugative elements. Evidence suggests that many of these elements are actively mobilizing within rhizobial populations, suggesting that regular symbiosis gene transfer is part of the ecology of rhizobial symbionts. At first glance, this is counterintuitive. The symbiosis trait is highly complex, multipartite and tightly coevolved with the legume hosts, while transfer of genes can be costly and disrupt coadaptation between the chromosome and the symbiosis genes. However, horizontal gene transfer is a process driven not only by the interests of the host bacterium, but also, and perhaps predominantly, by the interests of the MGEs that facilitate it. Thus understanding the role of horizontal gene transfer in the rhizobium-legume symbiosis requires a 'mobile genetic element's-eye view' on the ecology and evolution of this important symbiosis. This article is part of the theme issue 'The secret lives of microbial mobile genetic elements'.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".