MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394044389 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.6998876

A common venomous ancestor? Prevalent bee venom genes evolved before the aculeate stinger while few major toxins are bee-specific

2022· dataset· en· W4394044389 on OpenAlexaff
Koludarov, Velasque, Timm, Greve, Hamadou, Gupta, Lochnit, Heinzinger, Vilcinskas, Gloag, Harpour, Podsiadlowski, Rost, Dutertre, Stolle, Jackson Jackson, Von Reumont

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare and Venom Research
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBee venomVenomBiologyAncestorZoologyEcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Venoms, which have evolved numerous times in animals, are ideal models of convergent trait evolution. However, detailed genomic studies of toxin-encoding genes exist for only a few animal groups. The hyper-diverse hymenopteran insects are the most speciose venomous clade, but investigation of the origin of their venom genes has been largely neglected. Utilising a combination of genomic and proteo-transcriptomic data, we investigated the origin of 11 toxin genes in 29 published and three new hymenopteran genomes and compiled an up-to-date list of prevalent bee venom proteins. Observed patterns indicate that bee venom genes predominantly originate through single gene co-option with gene duplication contributing to subsequent diversification. Most Hymenoptera venom genes are shared by all members of the clade and only melittin and the new venom protein family anthophilin appear unique to the bee lineage. Most venom proteins thus predate the mega-radiation of hymenopterans and the evolution of the aculeate stinger.

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.006

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicHealthcare and Venom ResearchFrench-language works237,207