MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4375956017 · doi:10.1093/molbev/msad106

CAGEE: Computational Analysis of Gene Expression Evolution

2023· article· en· W4375956017 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Bertram, Ben Fulton, Jason P. Tourigny, Yadira Peña-García, Leonie C. Moyle, Matthew W. Hahn

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology and Evolution · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyRobustness (evolution)GeneEvolutionary biologyPhylogenetic treeGenomeComputational biologyGene expressionTranscriptomeGeneticsGene expression profilingPhylogenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the increasing abundance of whole transcriptome data, few methods are available to analyze global gene expression across phylogenies. Here, we present a new software package (Computational Analysis of Gene Expression Evolution [CAGEE]) for inferring patterns of increases and decreases in gene expression across a phylogenetic tree, as well as the rate at which these changes occur. In contrast to previous methods that treat each gene independently, CAGEE can calculate genome-wide rates of gene expression, along with ancestral states for each gene. The statistical approach developed here makes it possible to infer lineage-specific shifts in rates of evolution across the genome, in addition to possible differences in rates among multiple tissues sampled from the same species. We demonstrate the accuracy and robustness of our method on simulated data and apply it to a data set of ovule gene expression collected from multiple self-compatible and self-incompatible species in the genus Solanum to test hypotheses about the evolutionary forces acting during mating system shifts. These comparisons allow us to highlight the power of CAGEE, demonstrating its utility for use in any empirical system and for the analysis of most morphological traits. Our software is available at https://github.com/hahnlab/CAGEE/.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 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

Citations24
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology and EvolutionSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207