MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411948011 · doi:10.1101/2025.06.27.661976

Microbiome evolution plays a secondary role in host rapid adaptation

2025· preprint· en· W4411948011 on OpenAlexfundno aff
René S. Shahmohamadloo, Amir R Gabidulin, Ellie R. Andrews, Seth M. Rudman

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaLiber Ero Foundation
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Host (biology)MicrobiomeHost adaptationEvolutionary biologyBiologyComputational biologyGeneticsNeuroscienceGeneGenome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Understanding how populations adapt to environmental change is a central goal in evolutionary biology. Microbiomes have been proposed as a source of heritable variation that is central to rapid adaptation in hosts, yet empirical evidence supporting this remains limited, particularly in naturalistic settings. We combined a field evolution experiment in Drosophila melanogaster exposed to an insecticide with microbiome manipulations to disentangle the contributions of host standing genetic variation and microbiome evolution to adaptation. Within three generations, independent populations rapidly and repeatedly evolved increased survivorship, a defining feature of resistance evolution. Adaptive changes in sub-lethal traits such as reproductive output, stress tolerance, and body size occurred with a delayed response following the evolution of resistance. Core microbiome taxa declined following insecticide exposure, and resistant populations evolved to house lower microbial abundances. Axenic rearing and microbiome transplant experiments demonstrated that adaptation via host standing genetic variation was the mechanism for resistance evolution. Microbiome evolution played a secondary and cryptic role in host adaptation by masking slowed development rates that evolved in resistant populations. Together, these results reinforce the primacy of adaptation occurring through selection on host standing genetic variation while also demonstrating the contributions of microbiome evolution in host adaptation. Significance Identifying the mechanisms that allow organisms to adapt to environmental stress is a foundational goal in biology. Using field experimental evolution and microbiome manipulations in Drosophila melanogaster , we directly tested the relative contributions of host genomic evolution and microbiome evolution to adaptation. We found that adaptation to environmental stress occurred rapidly and repeatedly, driven primarily by selection on host standing genetic variation, with microbiome evolution acting as a secondary contributor. These findings reinforce the importance of host genetic variation in rapid adaptation and demonstrate that microbiome evolution can contribute to host evolutionary trajectories in a cryptic manner.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicGut microbiota and health→French-language works237,207→