Nucleotide diversity of the Chlamydomonas reinhardtii plastid genome: addressing the mutational-hazard hypothesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The mutational-hazard hypothesis argues that the noncoding-DNA content of a genome is a consequence of the mutation rate (mu) and the effective number of genes per locus in the population (N(g)). The hypothesis predicts that genomes with a high N(g)mu will be more compact than those with a small N(g)mu. Approximations of N(g)mu can be gained by measuring the nucleotide diversity at silent sites (pi(silent)). We addressed the mutation-hazard hypothesis apropos plastid-genome evolution by measuring pi(silent) of the Chlamydomonas reinhardtii plastid DNA (ptDNA), the most noncoding-DNA-dense plastid genome observed to date. The data presented here in conjunction with previously published values of pi(silent) for the C. reinhardtii mitochondrial and nuclear genomes, which are respectively compact and bloated, allow for a complete analysis of nucleotide diversity and genome compactness in all three genetic compartments of this model organism. RESULTS: In C. reinhardtii, the mean estimate of pi(silent) for the ptDNA (14.5 x 10(-3)) is less than that of the nuclear DNA (32 x 10(-3)) and greater than that of the mitochondrial DNA (8.5 x 10(-3)). On average, C. reinhardtii has approximately 4 times more silent-site ptDNA diversity than the mean value reported for land plants, which have more compact plastid genomes. The silent-site nucleotide diversity of the different ptDNA loci that were studied varied significantly: from 0 to 71 x 10(-3) for synonymous sites and from 0 to 42 x 10(-3) for intergenic regions. CONCLUSION: Our findings on silent-site ptDNA diversity are inconsistent with what would be expected under the mutational-hazard hypothesis and go against the documented trend in other systems of pi(silent) positively correlating with genome compactness. Overall, we highlight the lack of reliable nucleotide-diversity measurements for ptDNA and hope that the values presented here will act as sound data for future research concerning the mutational-hazard hypothesis and plastid evolution in general.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".