MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1969337639 · doi:10.1139/g05-004

Evolution of a triplet repeat in a conifer

2005· article· en· W1969337639 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kerry Ann Sokol, Claire G. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceNorth Carolina State University
KeywordsBiologyVicarianceMicrosatelliteEvolutionary biologyPhylogenetic treeAlleleGeneticsPhylogeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The opportunity to trace the evolution of a triplet repeat is rare, especially for seed-plant lineages with a well-defined fossil record. Microsatellite PtTX2133 sequences from 18 species in 2 conifer genera were used to calibrate the birth of a CAGn repeat, from its protomicrosatellite origins to its repeat expansion. Birth occurred in the hard-pine genome ~ 136 million years ago, or 14 million generations ago, then expanded as a polymorphic triplet repeat 136-100 million years before a major North American vicariance event. Calibration of the triplet-repeat birth and expansion is supported by the shared allelic lineages among Old and New World hard pines and the shared alleles solely among North American diploxylon or hard pines. Five CAGn repeat units appeared to be the expansion threshold for Old and New World diploxylon pines. Haploxylon pine species worldwide did not undergo birth and repeat expansion, remaining monomorphic, with a single imperfect 198-bp allele. A sister genus, Picea, had only a region of cryptic simplicity, preceding a proto-microsatellite region. The polymorphic triplet repeat in hard pines is older than some long-lived microsatellites reported for reptiles, yet younger than those reported for insects. Some cautionary points are raised about phylogenetic applications for this long-lived microsatellite.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.213
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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome→Same topicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases→French-language works237,207→