MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396780352 · doi:10.1186/s12866-024-03315-3

Exploring the diversity and evolutionary strategies of prophages in Hyphomicrobiales, comparing animal-associated with non-animal-associated bacteria

2024· article· en· W4396780352 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan Gonçalves‐Oliveira, Tyler Pattenden, Yaarit Nachum‐Biala, Keyla Carstens Marques de Sousa, Lindi M. Wahl, Shimon Harrus

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Microbiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial Community Ecology and Physiology
Canadian institutionsThe King's UniversityWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaIsrael Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyProphageDiversity (politics)Evolutionary biologyParasitologyGeneticsZoologyGeneBacteriophageEscherichia coli

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Hyphomicrobiales bacterial order (previously Rhizobiales) exhibits a wide range of lifestyle characteristics, including free-living, plant-association, nitrogen-fixing, and association with animals (Bartonella and Brucella). This study explores the diversity and evolutionary strategies of bacteriophages within the Hyphomicrobiales order, comparing animal-associated (AAB) with non-animal-associated bacteria (NAAB). We curated 560 high-quality complete genomes of 58 genera from this order and used the PHASTER server for prophage annotation and classification. For 19 genera with representative genomes, we curated 96 genomes and used the Defense-Finder server to summarize the type of anti-phage systems (APS) found in this order. We analyzed the genetic repertoire and length distributions of prophages, estimating evolutionary rates and comparing intact, questionable, and incomplete prophages in both groups. Analyses of best-fit parameters and bootstrap sensitivity were used to understand the evolutionary processes driving prophage gene content. A total of 1860 prophages distributed in Hyphomicrobiales were found, 695 in AAB and 1165 in the NAAB genera. The results revealed a similar number of prophages per genome in AAB and NAAB and a similar length distribution, suggesting shared mechanisms of genetic acquisition of prophage genes. Changes in the frequency of specific gene classes were observed between incomplete and intact prophages, indicating preferential loss or enrichment in both groups. The analysis of best-fit parameters and bootstrap sensitivity tests indicated a higher selection coefficient, induction rate, and turnover in NAAB genomes. We found 68 types of APS in Hyphomicrobiales; restriction modification (RM) and abortive infection (Abi) were the most frequent APS found for all Hyphomicrobiales, and within the AAB group. This classification of APS showed that NAAB genomes have a greater diversity of defense systems compared to AAB, which could be related to the higher rates of prophage induction and turnover in the latter group. Our study provides insights into the distributions of both prophages and APS in Hyphomicrobiales genomes, demonstrating that NAAB carry more defense systems against phages, while AAB show increased prophage stability and an increased number of incomplete prophages. These results suggest a greater role for domesticated prophages within animal-associated bacteria in Hyphomicrobiales.

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 score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC MicrobiologySame topicMicrobial Community Ecology and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207