MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402654759 · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-52568-z

Discovering the hidden function in fungal genomes

2024· review· en· W4402654759 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicholas C Gervais, Rebecca S. Shapiro

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer-related molecular mechanisms research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsFunction (biology)GenomeComputational biologyBiologyComputer scienceEvolutionary biologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New molecular technologies have helped unveil previously unexplored facets of the genome beyond the canonical proteome, including microproteins and short ORFs, products of alternative splicing, regulatory non-coding RNAs, as well as transposable elements, cis-regulatory DNA, and other highly repetitive regions of DNA. In this Review, we highlight what is known about this ‘hidden genome’ within the fungal kingdom. Using well-established model systems as a contextual framework, we describe key elements of this hidden genome in diverse fungal species, and explore how these factors perform critical functions in regulating fungal metabolism, stress tolerance, and pathogenesis. Finally, we discuss new technologies that may be adapted to further characterize the hidden genome in fungi. New molecular technologies have helped unveil facets of the genome beyond the canonical proteome, such as microproteins and short ORFs, products of alternative splicing, regulatory non-coding RNAs, transposable elements, and cis-regulatory DNA. In this Review, Gervais & Shapiro highlight what is known about this ‘hidden genome’ in fungi.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicCancer-related molecular mechanisms researchFrench-language works237,207