MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411296705 · doi:10.1016/j.tig.2025.05.004

Protist genomics: key to understanding eukaryotic evolution

2025· review· en· W4411296705 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra Schoenle, Ore Francis, John M. Archibald, Fabien Burki, Jan de Vries, Kenneth Dumack, Laura Eme, Isabelle Florent, Elisabeth Hehenberger, Tarja T. Hoffmeyer, Iker Irisarri, Enrique Lara, Michelle M. Leger, Julius Lukeš, Ramón Massana, Varsha Mathur, F. O. Nitsche, Jürgen F. H. Strassert, Alexandra Z. Worden, Vyacheslav Yurchenko, Javier del Campo, Ann‐Marie Waldvogel

Bibliographic record

VenueTrends in Genetics · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtist diversity and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtistBiologyGenomicsKey (lock)Genome BiologyEvolutionary biologyComputational biologyComparative genomicsGenomeGeneticsGeneEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

All eukaryotes other than animals, plants, and fungi are protists. Protists are highly diverse and found in nearly all environments, with key roles in planetary health and biogeochemical cycles. They represent the majority of eukaryotic diversity, making them essential for understanding eukaryotic evolution. However, these mainly unicellular, microscopic organisms are understudied and the generation of protist genomes lags far behind most multicellular lineages. Current genomic methods, which are primarily designed for animals and plants, are poorly suited for protists. Advancing protist genome research requires reevaluating plant- and animal-centric genomic standards. Future efforts must leverage emerging technologies and bioinformatics tools, ultimately enhancing our understanding of eukaryotic molecular and cell biology, ecology, and evolution.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.262 · 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.

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

Citations15
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrends in GeneticsSame topicProtist diversity and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207