MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evolution of the nuclear-encoded cytochrome oxidase subunits in vertebrates

2010· article· en· W1970132737 on OpenAlexaff
Alex G. Little, Katrinka M. Kocha, Stephen C. Lougheed, C. D. Moyes

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Genomics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGeneticsVertebrateGene duplicationGenePhylogenetic treeGenomeEvolutionary biologyGene isoformPseudogenePhylogeneticsZebrafishLineage (genetic)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vertebrate mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase (COX) possesses 10 nuclear-encoded subunits. Six subunits have paralogs in mammals, but the origins and distribution of isoforms among vertebrates have not been analyzed. We used Bayesian phylogenetic analysis to interpret the origins of each subunit, inferring the roles of gene and genome duplications. The paralogous ancestries of five genes were identical throughout the major vertebrate taxa: no paralogs of COX6c and COX7c, two paralogs of COX4 and COX6a, and three paralogs of COX7a. Two genes had an extra copy in teleosts (COX5a, COX5b), and three genes had additional copies in mammals (COX6b, COX7b, COX8). Focusing on early vertebrates, we examined structural divergence and explored transcriptional profiles across zebrafish tissues. Quantitative transcript profiles revealed dramatic differences in transcript abundance for different subunits. COX7b and COX4 transcripts were typically present at very low levels, whereas COX5a and COX8 were in vast excess in all tissues. For genes with paralogs, two general patterns emerged. For COX5a and COX8, there was ubiquitous expression of one paralog, with the other paralog in lower abundance in all tissues. COX4 and COX6a shared a distinct expression pattern, with one paralog dominant in brain and gills and the other in muscles. The isoform profiles in combination with phylogenetic analyses show that vertebrate COX isoform patterns are consistent with the hypothesis that early whole genome duplications in basal vertebrates governed the isoform repertoire in modern fish and tetrapods, though more recent lineage-specific gene/genome duplications also play a role in select subunits.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations40
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiological GenomicsSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207