MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389923321 · doi:10.1101/2023.12.18.572099

Coevolution of age-structured tolerance and virulence

2023· preprint· en· W4389923321 on OpenAlexaff
Lydia J. Buckingham, Ben Ashby

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsCoevolutionVirulenceBiologyHost (biology)Antagonistic CoevolutionExperimental evolutionEvolutionary biologyPersistence (discontinuity)Host resistanceGeneticsGeneSexual conflictSexual selectionImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract Hosts can evolve a variety of defences against parasitism, including resistance (which prevents or reduces the spread of infection) and tolerance (which protects against virulence). Some organisms have evolved different levels of tolerance at different life-stages, which is likely to be the result of coevolution with pathogens, and yet it is currently unclear how coevolution drives patterns of age-specific tolerance. Here, we use a model of tolerance-virulence coevolution to investigate how age structure influences coevolutionary dynamics. Specifically, we explore how coevolution unfolds when tolerance and virulence (disease-induced mortality) are age-specific compared to when these traits are uniform across the host lifespan. We find that coevolutionary cycling is relatively common when host tolerance is age-specific, but cycling does not occur when tolerance is the same across all ages. We also find that age-structured tolerance can lead to selection for higher virulence in shorter-lived than in longer-lived hosts, whereas non-age-structured tolerance always leads virulence to increase with host lifespan. Our findings therefore suggest that age structure can have substantial qualitative impacts on host-pathogen coevolution.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics→French-language works237,207→