Comparative genomics of protoploid <i>Saccharomycetaceae</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our knowledge of yeast genomes remains largely dominated by the extensive studies on Saccharomyces cerevisiae and the consequences of its ancestral duplication, leaving the evolution of the entire class of hemiascomycetes only partly explored. We concentrate here on five species of Saccharomycetaceae, a large subdivision of hemiascomycetes, that we call "protoploid" because they diverged from the S. cerevisiae lineage prior to its genome duplication. We determined the complete genome sequences of three of these species: Kluyveromyces (Lachancea) thermotolerans and Saccharomyces (Lachancea) kluyveri (two members of the newly described Lachancea clade), and Zygosaccharomyces rouxii. We included in our comparisons the previously available sequences of Kluyveromyces lactis and Ashbya (Eremothecium) gossypii. Despite their broad evolutionary range and significant individual variations in each lineage, the five protoploid Saccharomycetaceae share a core repertoire of approximately 3300 protein families and a high degree of conserved synteny. Synteny blocks were used to define gene orthology and to infer ancestors. Far from representing minimal genomes without redundancy, the five protoploid yeasts contain numerous copies of paralogous genes, either dispersed or in tandem arrays, that, altogether, constitute a third of each genome. Ancient, conserved paralogs as well as novel, lineage-specific paralogs were identified.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".