Evolution and characterization of the fatty acid-binding proteins (fabps) in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is suggested that gene or genome duplication is the driving force in evolution that leads to speciation. Two models, the classical model and the duplication- degeneration-complementation (DDC) model, have been proposed on the fates of gene duplicates resulting from either a gene or a genome duplication event. The classical model suggests that one of the gene duplicates might result in loss of function (non- functionalization) or gain of a new function (neo-functionalization) depending on whether the accumulated mutations over the years are deleterious or beneficial to the organism. In the DDC model, it is proposed that each of the gene duplicates might accumulate different deleterious mutations in the regulatory region of the gene, such that these genes partition the ancestral gene function (sub-functionalization). Combinations of the phylogenetic analysis of many gene families support that salmonids have undergone two additional whole genome duplications compared to the mammals, one occurred in the common ancestors of teleosts and another happened in the common ancestor of salmonids approximately 25-120 million years ago. In this thesis, the evolution of the fatty acid-binding protein (fabp) family in fish and salmonids was examined. I have characterized eighteen unique fabp genes in Atlantic salmon. These include the seven fabp sub-families described previously in fish. Phylogenetic analyses and conservation of synteny support the two whole genome duplication events in the common ancestors of teleosts and salmonids and indicate when gene losses occurred. Genetic mapping of fabp gene duplicates to homeologous chromosomes in Atlantic salmon also support that they arose by the 4R genome duplication. I also searched for the signatures of neo-functionalization and sub-functionalization by calculating dN/dS ratios, examining the nature of amino acid substitutions and expression patterns, and suggested the fates of fabp gene duplicates in Atlantic salmon. Overall, the findings of this project provide insight into the evolutionary processes at play in salmonid genomes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".