MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gut Microbial Intersections with Human Ecology and Evolution

2023· article· en· W4385266438 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Katherine R. Amato, Rachel N. Carmody

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Anthropology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsMicrobiomeEcologyHuman microbiomeBiologyAdaptation (eye)NicheEvolutionary ecologyHuman Microbiome ProjectHost (biology)Niche constructionEcological nicheHuman evolutionEvolutionary biologyHabitatBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although microbiome science is relatively young, our knowledge of human-microbiome interactions is growing rapidly and has already begun to transform our understanding of human ecology and evolution. Here we summarize our current understanding of three-way interactions between the gut microbiota, human ecology, and human evolution. We review the factors driving microbiome variation within and between individuals and populations, as well as comparative data from nonhuman primates that allow a more direct examination of microbial relationships with host ecology and evolution. Collectively, these data sets can help illuminate generalizable principles governing host-microbiome-environment interactions, the processes contributing to bidirectional influences between the human gut microbiota and the human ecological niche, and past changes in the human microbiome that may have harbored consequences for human adaptation. Developing richer insight into host-microbiome-environment interactions will ultimately broaden our view of human biology and its response to changing environments.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.324
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of AnthropologySame topicGut microbiota and healthFrench-language works237,207