LORE1, an active low‐copy‐number TY3‐<i>gypsy</i> retrotransposon family in the model legume <i>Lotus japonicus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have identified a low-copy-number retrotransposon family present in nine to 10 copies in the Lotus japonicus model legume genome, and characterized its activity. LORE1 (Lotus retrotransposon 1) belongs to the Ty3-gypsy group of elements, and is a long terminal repeat (LTR) retrotransposon. Genetic mapping located LORE1 elements in gene-rich regions of Lotus chromosomes, and analysis of native as well as new insertion sites revealed integration outside the highly repetitive sequences of centromeres and telomeres. Sequencing of individual LORE1 family members identified several intact elements, and analysis of new insertions showed that at least one member is active and reinserts into functional genes, creating gene-disruption mutations. Southern blot analysis and SSAP on a selection of symbiotic mutants revealed up to 12 new insertion sites in individual mutant lines and a Mendelian segregation of new inserts. Expression analysis showed that LORE1 elements are transcribed in all organs analysed and, in contrast to other active retrotransposons, LORE1 appears not to be transcriptionally upregulated during in vitro tissue culture. Activity of LORE1 in callus and whole plants suggests that a simple insertion mutagenesis based on endogenous LORE1 elements can be established for Lotus.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".