Genome Fragmentation Is Not Confined to the Peridinin Plastid in Dinoflagellates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When plastids are transferred between eukaryote lineages through series of endosymbiosis, their environment changes dramatically. Comparison of dinoflagellate plastids that originated from different algal groups has revealed convergent evolution, suggesting that the host environment mainly influences the evolution of the newly acquired organelle. Recently the genome from the anomalously pigmented dinoflagellate Karlodinium veneficum plastid was uncovered as a conventional chromosome. To determine if this haptophyte-derived plastid contains additional chromosomal fragments that resemble the mini-circles of the peridin-containing plastids, we have investigated its genome by in-depth sequencing using 454 pyrosequencing technology, PCR and clone library analysis. Sequence analyses show several genes with significantly higher copy numbers than present in the chromosome. These genes are most likely extrachromosomal fragments, and the ones with highest copy numbers include genes encoding the chaperone DnaK(Hsp70), the rubisco large subunit (rbcL), and two tRNAs (trnE and trnM). In addition, some photosystem genes such as psaB, psaA, psbB and psbD are overrepresented. Most of the dnaK and rbcL sequences are found as shortened or fragmented gene sequences, typically missing the 3'-terminal portion. Both dnaK and rbcL are associated with a common sequence element consisting of about 120 bp of highly conserved AT-rich sequence followed by a trnE gene, possibly serving as a control region. Decatenation assays and Southern blot analysis indicate that the extrachromosomal plastid sequences do not have the same organization or lengths as the minicircles of the peridinin dinoflagellates. The fragmentation of the haptophyte-derived plastid genome K. veneficum suggests that it is likely a sign of a host-driven process shaping the plastid genomes of dinoflagellates.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".