MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404688684 · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3002917

Reconstructing the last common ancestor of all eukaryotes

2024· review· en· W4404688684 on OpenAlexafffund
Thomas A. Richards, Laura Eme, John M. Archibald, Guy Leonard, Susana M. Coelho, Alex de Mendoza, Christophe Dessimoz, Pavel Doležal, Lillian K. Fritz‐Laylin, Toni Gabaldón, Vladimı́r Hampl, Geert J.P.L. Kops, Michelle M. Leger, Purificación López‐García, James O. McInerney, David Moreira, Sergio A. Muñoz-Gómez, Daniel J. Richter, Iñaki Ruiz‐Trillo, Alyson E. Santoro, Arnau Sebé-Pedrós, ‎Berend Snel, Courtney W. Stairs, Eelco C. Tromer, Jolien J. E. van Hooff, Bill Wickstead, Tom A. Williams, Andrew J. Roger, Joel B. Dacks, Jeremy G. Wideman

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Biology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtist diversity and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHORIZON EUROPE European Research CouncilBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekDalhousie UniversityNational Institute of General Medical SciencesWissenschaftskolleg zu BerlinNational Science FoundationRoyal SocietyGordon and Betty Moore FoundationSimons Foundation
KeywordsBiologyAncestorEvolutionary biologyMost recent common ancestorCommon descentGeneticsPhylogeneticsComputational biologyPhylogenetic treeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the origin of eukaryotic cells is one of the most difficult problems in all of biology. A key challenge relevant to the question of eukaryogenesis is reconstructing the gene repertoire of the last eukaryotic common ancestor (LECA). As data sets grow, sketching an accurate genomics-informed picture of early eukaryotic cellular complexity requires provision of analytical resources and a commitment to data sharing. Here, we summarise progress towards understanding the biology of LECA and outline a community approach to inferring its wider gene repertoire. Once assembled, a robust LECA gene set will be a useful tool for evaluating alternative hypotheses about the origin of eukaryotes and understanding the evolution of traits in all descendant lineages, with relevance in diverse fields such as cell biology, microbial ecology, biotechnology, agriculture, and medicine. In this Consensus View, we put forth the status quo and an agreed path forward to reconstruct LECA's gene content.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.604

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 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

Citations46
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS BiologySame topicProtist diversity and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207