Applying phylogenetic methods for species delimitation to distinguish B-cell clonal families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The adaptive immune system generates a diverse array of B-cell receptors through the processes of V(D)J recombination and somatic hypermutation. B-cell receptors that bind to an antigen will undergo clonal expansion, creating a Darwinian evolutionary dynamic within individuals. A key step in studying these dynamics is to identify sequences derived from the same ancestral V(D)J recombination event (i.e. a clonal family). There are a number of widely used methods for accomplishing this task but a major limitation of all of them is that they rely, at least in part, on the ability to map sequences to a germline reference set. This requirement is particularly problematic in non-model systems where we often know little about the germline allelic diversity in the study population. Recognizing that delimiting B-cell clonal families is analogous to delimiting species from single locus data, we propose a novel strategy of reconstructing the phylogenetic tree of all B-cell sequences in a sample and using a popular species delimitation method, multi-rate Poisson Tree Processes (mPTP), to delimit clonal families. Using extensive simulations, we show that not only does this phylogenetically explicit approach perform well for the purpose of delimiting clonal families when no reference allele set is available, it performs similarly to state-of-the-art techniques developed specifically for B-cell data even when we have a complete reference allele set. Additionally, our analysis of an empirical dataset shows that mPTP performs similarly to leading methods in the field. These findings demonstrate the utility of using off-the-shelf phylogenetic techniques for analyzing B-cell clonal dynamics in non-model systems, and suggests that phylogenetic inference techniques may be potentially combined with mapping based approaches for even more robust inferences, even in model systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".