Corpus 1,272 assessed · 1,173 scored · 643 reproduced ≥75 · 168 flagged ·∅ 74.1/100
← New search

Plasmid transmission dynamics and evolution of partner quality in a natural population of Rhizobium leguminosarum.

mBio · 2025
L1 86/100 3/4
Why this verdict

The main results reproduced: recomputed values matched the published ones within tolerance.

Reproduced on the brainbox compute brainarbeit.com
Scoring basis — itemised

Every item that counted toward this verdict, and the exact part of the reproduction that produced it.

Supporting (toward a concern)
Content-critical question only partially held
+2 pts
From: Q5 · Derivability / plausibility 🟡
Content-critical question only partially held
+2 pts
From: Q8 · Severity of the miss (overall human judgment) 🟡
Minor / cosmetic deviation
+1 pts
From: Q3 · Location of the main deviation 🟡
Minor / cosmetic deviation
+1 pts
From: Q4 · Cause of the deviation 🟡
Minor / cosmetic deviation
+1 pts
From: Q6 · Severity of the deviation 🟡
Concordant (toward reproduced)
Code + data deposited & functional
-2 pts
From: Data & code availability Available & functional
Total score +5
✓ What held up
  • Same input data as the authors
  • Reported values were directly comparable
  • The central claim held under reproduction
What did not (or only partly)
  • 🟡A deviation arose in the data or preprocessing
  • 🟡A deviation was attributed to the published material
  • 🟡Reported values were not (fully) derivable from the shared data
  • 🟡The deviation was non-trivial in magnitude
  • 🟡Overall, the reproduction showed a material discrepancy
How its reproducibility compares
86/100
Reproducibility score
0.7 SD above mean
vs. all fields · 1173 studies
🎯 Scores higher than 70% of all assessed papers rank 334 of 1173 scored

A 0–100 reproducibility-quality score from the per-question grades, shown as a z-score: standard deviations above (+) or below (−) the mean of comparable assessments.

Reproduction agent’s raw note

Described well enough to reproduce the core pipeline outputs. The 62 deposited PacBio-HiFi complete genomes (BioProject PRJNA310138, GenBank GCA_052941675.1..GCA_052947415.1) are the exact FASTA input for the named third-party tools (Spine-Nucmer-SNPs + sourmash). REPRODUCED 1:1 (exact): the entire plasmid inventory from the deposited replicon structure -- 256 extrachromosomal elements, 1-6 per strain, 226 (88%) in Types I-IV, 16 (6%) in Types V-VIII, and Table 1 N column 56/56/56/58 (all C1-C5 exact). WITHIN-TOL: an INDEPENDENT sourmash rerun (scaled=10000,k=31, Jaccard>=0.1, connected components) re-derives 4 dominant plasmid clusters holding 232/256 = 90.6% of plasmids vs the paper's 226/88% -- same pipeline, same parameters, not trusting author labels (C7). PARTIAL: Spine core-genome length (Table 1) reproduces for the two types with a real conserved backbone -- Type I 0.62 vs 0.61 Mbp and pSym Type IV 0.05 vs 0.05 Mbp -- but Types II/III collapse to ~0 under Spine's default 100%-presence core, so the paper's 0.39/0.50 Mbp require a relaxed/curated core threshold (likely PIRATE) that Methods do not pin down (C8). PARTIAL: plasmid genome fraction 29.19% is not exactly recoverable from deposited metadata (35.0% counting all plasmids vs 21.6% excluding the ptI chromid; the paper's definition is unstated) (C6). NOT ATTEMPTED (the hard last ~20%): re-assembly from raw PacBio reads (Trycycler/Flye/Hifiasm/Raven), the GRF gene-tree discordance distributions (Fig 4), the pSym Chi-squared treatment test (Fig 5, P=0.042), and repABC operon annotation counts -- bespoke stats / annotation-dependent and not cleanly specified. Fabrication: none detected; the headline inventory and typing numbers are backed exactly by the public data. Spine bioconda package is broken (missing scripts/nucmer_multi.pl) -> fixed by git-cloning egonozer/Spine.

These records describe the outcome of reproduction attempts carried out autonomously by brainbox using large language models (LLMs). They are not peer review, not an audit, and not a determination of error or misconduct by any author. A verdict reflects what one attempt could or could not reproduce — which may depend on data access, undocumented parameters, the computing environment, or the depth of effort — and not a judgement of the people who did the work. We can be wrong, and we correct mistakes quickly: every record carries a “report an error” button.

Assessment versions

Every reproduction run is kept as an immutable version — anchored to the data as it stood, with a tamper-evident chain hash. A rerun (e.g. after an author updates a deposit) adds a new version; the previous one stays on record.

  1. v1 current initial assessment Score 86
    assessed: 2026-06-14 ⛓ 55bf62556629
✎ I am an author of this paper

Updated or fixed a deposit, or is there an erratum? Ask us to re-run the metrics. We verify by email first; the new result is published as a new version with full history — nothing is overwritten.

Reason for the rerun

We email you a confirmation link first. The rerun is an objective re-measurement — it cannot change the verdict in your favour, only ask us to look again.

Provenance — full disclosure

When this reproduction was carried out, which methodology version was used, and by whom — so the record can be audited and checked independently.

Reproduced
2026-06-14
Rubric version
v1.0
Assessed by
🤖 AI curator · claude (ai-curator room) · v1.0 · run #1 2026-06-15
no human curator yet
Last updated
2026-08-05

Provisional, curator- or AI-assessed, and independently checkable. A reproduction outcome states what one attempt could reproduce — not a judgement of the authors.

Deep full-text extraction

Model: opus
Founding hypothesis

How do patterns of gene content, sequence diversity, size, and horizontal versus vertical transmission vary across the multiple coexisting plasmid types within a natural population of clover-associated Rhizobium leguminosarum, and does plasmid horizontal transmission underlie the long-term nitrogen fertilization-driven decline in symbiotic partner quality?

Core claims
  • Of the four most frequent plasmid types, types II and III have more stable size, larger core genomes, and track the chromosomal phylogeny (more vertical transmission), while types I and IV (pSym) vary in size and gene content with phylogenies consistent with frequent horizontal transmission. finding
  • Differentiation in pSym (type IV) subtypes is driven by long-term nitrogen fertilization and implicates plasmid horizontal transmission in the rapid evolution of partner quality decline. finding
  • The symbiosis plasmid (pSym) is the most discordant with the chromosomal phylogeny, indicating the most horizontal transmission among plasmid types. finding
  • A k-mer-based clustering approach considering core and non-core plasmid regions, combined with phylogenomic GRF-distance distributions, is used to categorize plasmids and infer mode of inheritance. method
  • 62 novel reference-quality long-read genomes characterize 256 replicons (the plasmidome) of a natural Rhizobium population from fertilized vs unfertilized LTER plots. resource
  • Canonical symbiosis genes (nif, fix, nod) are limited to type IV plasmids; four of 62 strains lacked the pSym entirely. finding
  • Plasmid types track chromosomal genospecies (types I–III and V–VIII), except type IV which is found across both gsB and gsE. finding
  • Plasmid gene content often, but not always, tracks the repABC-based Rh incompatibility group. finding
Experimental setups
Assay System Perturbation Readout Platform
Long-read whole-genome sequencing and de novo assembly of closed reference-quality genomes 62 clover-associated Rhizobium leguminosarum nodule isolates (natural population from LTER KBS, Michigan) long-term nitrogen fertilization (28 fertilized, 34 unfertilized field plots) complete genome assemblies; number/size of extrachromosomal replicons
k-mer signature clustering / network analysis 256 plasmids/replicons of the Rhizobium plasmidome none Jaccard index similarity, plasmid type categorization (weighted undirected network)
Genome annotation and COG functional assignment plasmidome of 62 isolates none gene presence-absence, orthologous gene clusters, COG groups NCBI PGAP
Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) 256 plasmids none Jaccard distance of presence-absence of orthologous gene clusters
repABC operon detection / Rh typing 256 replicons none presence of repABC operons, incompatibility Rh group assignment
Phylogenomic / phylogenetic tree building and tanglegram comparison chromosomal core genes and homologous plasmid core genes (gsE and gsB) none tree topology, Generalized Robinson-Foulds (GRF) discordance distributions
Population genomic diversity statistics plasmid types with >1 representative none nucleotide diversity (π), average nucleotide identity (ANI), core gene number/length
Whole-genome synteny alignment gsB plasmid types VII and VIII aligned to gsE type III plasmid none syntenic aligned blocks / shared plasmid history
Key results
  • 256 extrachromosomal elements identified across 62 strains; 255 carried at least one repABC operon and 17 had two distinct repABC operons 256 replicons
  • Plasmids account for ~29.19% of the genomes on average 29.19%
  • 226 of 256 plasmids (88%) fell into four main types (I–IV); 16 (6%) into types V–VIII 88% (226/256)
  • pSym (type IV) most discordant with chromosome; mean GRF distance between chromosome gene trees was 72.46 72.46 ± 5.40 sd
  • Type IV plasmids vary substantially in size and have the smallest core (0.05 Mbp core length, 49 core genes), versus more stable types II/III type IV size 0.26–0.46 Mbp, 49 core genes
  • Types I, II, III present in all 56 gsE strains; type IV found in 58/62 strains across both genospecies 58/62 strains
  • Four of 62 strains lacked the pSym, corroborating loss of this non-essential element in a natural population 4/62
  • Pairwise core gene content overlap: type I vs V = 56%, type II vs VI = 74%; 209 genes shared between accessory plasmids and pSyms 56%, 74%, 209 genes
Key statistics
  • other ~29.19% (average proportion of genomes made up by plasmids)
  • count 256 (total extrachromosomal elements identified in the population)
  • count 226 (88%) (plasmids falling into the four main types I–IV)
  • other 72.46 ± 5.40 sd (mean GRF distance between gene trees of the chromosome (gsE))
  • other π = 0.015–0.021 (nucleotide diversity range across plasmid types I–IV)
  • other ANI 95.25–97.94% (average nucleotide identity across plasmid types I–IV)
  • other 56% and 74% (core gene content overlap type I vs V and type II vs VI)
  • count 209 (genes shared between at least one accessory plasmid and one pSym)

Statistical methods review

Model: sonnet

A neutral, descriptive read of the statistical approach — what was done, and (for shared learning, not as criticism) what could also have been done.

This comparative genomics study assembled 62 closed reference-quality genomes of natural Rhizobium leguminosarum isolates (28 from long-term nitrogen-fertilized plots, 34 from unfertilized controls) and characterized 256 extrachromosomal replicons. Plasmid grouping used k-mer Jaccard similarity networks; gene content diversity was visualized by PCoA on binary presence-absence matrices of orthologous gene clusters; and vertical versus horizontal transmission propensity was inferred by comparing plasmid and chromosomal phylogenies via Generalized Robinson-Foulds (GRF) distance distributions from resampled gene trees. Nucleotide diversity (π) and ANI were reported as descriptive summaries; dispersion was expressed as standard deviation.

Replicationbiological Sample size62 total strains (28 from N-fertilized plots, 34 from unfertilized control plots at KBS LTER); no formal power analysis mentioned GroupsFertilized vs. unfertilized field plots; gsE vs. gsB genospecies; plasmid types I–VIII compared for size, core content, diversity, and transmission mode Pairingunpaired Randomization/blindingnot stated DispersionSD Effect sizesno Confidence intervalsno Multiplicity correctionnone stated
Statistical tests used
Test Applied to n Assumptions
All-vs-all Jaccard Index k-mer similarity network clustering (threshold > 0.1) Grouping all 256 replicons into discrete plasmid types (Fig. 1) 256 plasmids not stated
Principal Coordinate Analysis (PCoA) on Jaccard distance from binary presence-absence matrix of orthologous gene clusters Visualization of gene content variation across plasmid types (Fig. 3) 256 plasmids not stated
Generalized Robinson-Foulds (GRF) distance on resampled gene tree distributions Quantifying phylogenetic discordance between each plasmid type and the chromosomal tree (Fig. 4; Fig. S3A–D) 56 gsE strains for within-genospecies core comparison not stated
Bootstrap support on maximum-likelihood concatenated core chromosomal phylogeny Core chromosomal tree topology (Fig. 2); nodes with bootstrap > 85 marked 62 strains not stated
Nucleotide diversity (π) and Average Nucleotide Identity (ANI) as descriptive population-genetic statistics Summary of within-type sequence diversity across plasmid types (Table 1) Varies by type (e.g., n = 56 for types I–III; n = 4 for types V–VIII) na
Approaches that could also have been used
  • Plasmids were grouped via k-mer Jaccard similarity networks with a fixed threshold (> 0.1) to define plasmid types
    Could also: Alignment-free distance tools such as MASH, or dedicated plasmid-typing frameworks such as MOB-suite or PopPUNK, could also define plasmid clusters — Established typing tools provide reference-anchored nomenclature and may offer data-driven or statistically motivated thresholds; comparing results across methods can confirm that cluster boundaries are robust rather than threshold-dependent
  • Gene content variation was visualized by PCoA on binary (presence-absence) Jaccard distances among orthologous gene clusters
    Could also: Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) or UMAP could also be applied to the same distance matrix — NMDS does not assume linearity of distances and can better preserve rank-order relationships in non-Euclidean spaces; reporting a stress value or goodness-of-fit statistic alongside ordination axes quantifies how faithfully the 2-D projection represents the full distance matrix
  • Phylogenetic discordance was quantified using GRF distance distributions derived from gene tree subsampling
    Could also: Gene concordance factors (gCF) or site concordance factors (sCF), as implemented in IQ-TREE2, could also quantify discordance per branch — Concordance factors summarize, for each internal branch, the fraction of loci or sites that support that clade, providing a per-branch complement to the global GRF distribution and not requiring a fixed reference topology for comparison
  • Dispersion of GRF distances across gene tree subsamples was reported as mean ± standard deviation
    Could also: Bootstrap 95% confidence intervals or full empirical distributions (violin or box plots) could also characterize spread — GRF distances are bounded at zero and may be skewed; CIs or distributional plots complement SD by communicating uncertainty around the mean and the shape of the distribution without assuming symmetry
  • Differentiation of pSym subtypes between fertilized and unfertilized plots was described in terms of observed frequency patterns
    Could also: A chi-squared test, Fisher's exact test, or a permutation/randomization test on subtype composition could formally assess whether subtype frequencies differ between fertilization treatments — Formal tests would attach a measure of uncertainty (p-value or CI) to the observed frequency differences, complementing the descriptive comparison and clarifying whether the pattern is consistent with sampling variation alone
  • Nucleotide diversity (π) and ANI were used as descriptive per-type summaries without formal comparison across plasmid types
    Could also: A non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test with post-hoc Dunn correction, or a permutation ANOVA, on per-strain π or ANI values could also compare diversity levels across types — Formal tests would quantify whether observed differences in diversity metrics across plasmid types exceed those expected by chance, providing inferential complement to the descriptive summaries in Table 1
Software: NCBI Prokaryotic Genome Annotation Pipeline (PGAP) · COG group assignment (specific tool not named) · Phylogenetic tree construction software (not named in available text) · K-mer/network analysis tool for Jaccard similarity graph (not named in available text)

Citation network

Where this publication sits in the reproducibility-weighted citation graph — what it is built on, and what is built on it. Citation data from OpenAlex.

Citations
2
Impact: low
Foundation confidence
None of its references are in our reproducibility record yet — its foundation cannot be assessed.
Topics

No assessed neighbours yet — the network grows as more papers are assessed.

What was reproduced

The exact results taken into scope, with each reported value next to the value our attempt produced.

Scope — pmid-41212030

Paper: Vereau Gorbitz et al. 2025, mBio. Plasmid transmission dynamics and evolution of partner quality in a natural population of Rhizobium leguminosarum. PMID 41212030 · PMCID PMC12691615 · DOI 10.1128/mbio.02497-25

Named code (brief): https://github.com/Alan-Collins/Spine-Nucmer-SNPs — a third-party SNP/core-genome pipeline (Spine → nucmer → SNP extraction → alignment → IQ-TREE). Applying this existing tool to the paper's own data is a valid reproduction (brief rule P16).

Data: BioProject PRJNA310138 / SRA SRP069749. The reproducible artifact is the set of 62 complete genome assemblies (PacBio HiFi, Trycycler) deposited as GenBank WGS GCA_052941675.1 … GCA_052947415.1 (chromosome + plasmids as labelled replicons). These FASTA assemblies are exactly the input the Spine-Nucmer-SNPs and sourmash pipelines consume. All 62 resolve publicly on NCBI Datasets.

Pipelines named in Methods and whether in scope

Reported result Pipeline In scope? Why
Replicon inventory: 256 extrachromosomal elements; 1–6 per strain assembly structure (count replicons) YES (primary) directly derivable from deposited complete-genome replicon structure
Plasmid clustering: 226 (88%) in Types I–IV; 16 (6%) in V–VIII sourmash (scaled=10000, k=31) + Jaccard≥0.1 graph components YES exact parameters given; rerun independently on plasmid FASTAs
Table 1: per-type core genome length + core gene count (Types I–IV) SPINE-Nucmer pipeline (the named repo) + Mummer 3.2 YES (stretch) the named third-party tool; needs per-type grouping first
Table 1: per-type ANI (97.94 / 97.32 / 97.89 / 95.25 %) Popgenome v2.7.2 partial derivable from core alignment; secondary
Chromosomal phylogeny: 56 gsE + 4 gsB + 2 outliers SPINE-Nucmer core SNPs + IQ-TREE2 stretch the named tool on chromosomes; qualitative clade recovery
Plasmid genome fraction ~29.19% assembly bp ratios YES (reported, def. unclear) computable but exact definition not recoverable → honest grade
Gene-tree discordance GRF distances (Fig 4); pSym Chi² P=0.042 (Fig 5) custom R resampling NO (out of scope) bespoke 1000× resampling stats, the hard last-20%
Assembly itself (Trycycler/Flye/Hifiasm/Raven from raw PacBio) assembly NO re-assembly of raw reads not attempted; we consume the deposited assemblies
repABC operon counts (255/256, 17 with two) manual/annotation NO annotation-dependent, not cleanly specified

Strategy (80/20)

  1. Replicon inventory from deposited assemblies — exact counts (DONE from metadata).
  2. sourmash clustering independently re-derives plasmid types — validates the author-deposited ptI–ptVIII labels rather than trusting them.
  3. Spine core genome per type → Table 1 core length / gene count (stretch). We do NOT attempt re-assembly, GRF discordance stats, or the Chi² treatment test.
Figures / tables: Table
C1
Reported
256 extrachromosomal elements
Reproduced
256
exact
C2
Reported
1-6 plasmids per strain
Reproduced
1-6
exact
C3
Reported
226 (88%) plasmids in Types I-IV
Reproduced
226 (88.3%)
exact
C4
Reported
16 (6%) plasmids in Types V-VIII
Reproduced
16 (6.25%)
exact
C5
Reported
Table 1 N per type I/II/III/IV = 56/56/56/58
Reproduced
56/56/56/58
exact
C6
Reported
plasmid genome fraction ~29.19%
Reproduced
35.0% (all) / 21.6% (excl. ptI chromid)
partial
C7
Reported
sourmash typing: 226 (88%) in 4 clusters
Reproduced
232 (90.6%) in 4 clusters
within tolerance
C8
Reported
Table 1 core-genome length (Spine) 0.61/0.39/0.50/0.05 Mbp
Reproduced
0.62/0.0/0.0/0.05 Mbp (Type I & pSym Type IV reproduce; II/III collapse)
partial

Assessments & scoring basis

Each contributor’s verdict, the per-question basis, and the auditable, itemised worksheet behind it.

🤖 AI curator · claude (ai-curator room) · v1.0 L1 86/100

An automated assessment. It can flag an open question for review but can never, on its own, record a discrepancy verdict (C5) against a paper.

🟢1. Data identity
🟢2. Endpoint comparability
🟡3. Location of the main deviation
🟡4. Cause of the deviation
🟡5. Derivability / plausibility
🟡6. Severity of the deviation
🟢7. Core claim
🟡8. Severity of the miss (overall human judgment)
Scoring basis — itemised

Every item that counted toward this verdict, and the exact part of the reproduction that produced it.

Supporting (toward a concern)
Content-critical question only partially held
+2 pts
From: Q5 · Derivability / plausibility 🟡
Content-critical question only partially held
+2 pts
From: Q8 · Severity of the miss (overall human judgment) 🟡
Minor / cosmetic deviation
+1 pts
From: Q3 · Location of the main deviation 🟡
Minor / cosmetic deviation
+1 pts
From: Q4 · Cause of the deviation 🟡
Minor / cosmetic deviation
+1 pts
From: Q6 · Severity of the deviation 🟡
Concordant (toward reproduced)
Code + data deposited & functional
-2 pts
From: Data & code availability Available & functional
Total score +5

The headline plasmid inventory and typing (C1–C5 exact, C7 within-tolerance at 90.6% vs 88%) reproduce 1:1 from the deposited 62 complete genomes, with no fabrication signal — the central descriptive conclusion holds. The only deviations are C6 (the 29.19% genome fraction is definition-dependent and sits between 35.0% and 21.6%, with the paper's definition unstated) and C8 (Types II/III core lengths collapse to 0.0 under Spine's strict core because the relaxed threshold is not specified). These are explainable underspecification gaps on the authors'/method side, not core-logic errors, so the overall reproduction is solid-with-deviations rather than 1:1 or critical.

🤝
Reproduced automatically — and fairly

Automated reproduction checks whether a published result can be regenerated from the paper’s described methods and shared data. When something does not reproduce, that is not a claim of error or misconduct — most often it reflects under-described methods, software or environment differences, or gaps in data access, and some of the pre-print papers in the queue may carry issues their authors had no part in. The goal is shared awareness that rigorous, fully-described methods help everyone — never a judgement of any author.

Are you an author? We would genuinely like to hear from you — to clarify the record, add data or code, re-run the pipeline after an accession update, and publish your response right next to the assessment. Everything here is open and auditable.

🚩 Report an error in this record

Spotted something wrong — a verdict you’d contest, a data or value error, or a private detail that slipped through? Tell us, with a short justification. Authors and readers are equally welcome to write in; we review every report.

Prefer email, or the form below not working? Contact us at support@doesitreproduce.com.

Reproduction footprint

claude-opus-4-8

Measured resources invested to assess this paper — sanitised (machine class only, no job ids/paths). Compute = HPC accounting (SLURM); tokens = the AI agent's session.

193 k
tokens (I/O) · 14.2 M incl. cache
24 min
runtime · 2.69 CPU-h
1.3 GB
peak RAM
2
HPC jobs
hummel
machine