MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2037751099 · doi:10.1139/g11-080

Is RNA editing implicated in group II intron survival in the angiosperm mitochondrial genome?

2012· article· en· W2037751099 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hiroyo Kagami, Hironori Nagano, Yoshiya Takahashi, Tetsuo Mikami, Tomohiko Kubo

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHokkaido University
KeywordsBiologyIntronGroup II intronCaryophyllaceaeRNA editingGeneticsRNAGeneRNA splicingBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introns may be considered as optional because they are removed from mRNA molecules, but introns are fairly preserved for unknown reasons. Previously, the mitochondrial rps3 gene of sugar beet ( Beta vulgaris L., Caryophyllales) was shown to represent a unique example of an intron loss. We have determined the distribution of the rps3 intron in 19 Caryophyllalean species. The intron was absent from the Amaranthaceae and the Achatocarpaceae. In the Caryophyllaceae, Dianthus japonicus rps3 was pseudogenized, but the intronic sequence was retained. Intact intron-bearing rps3 copies were cloned from Portulaca grandiflora and Myrtillocactus geometrizans , members of the sister clade of the Amaranthaceae-Achatocarpaceae-Caryophyllaceae clade. Most of the C-to-U RNA-editing sites in P. grandiflora and M. geometrizans rps3 transcripts were homologous in the two species, as well as in the sugar beet rps3, which, unlike the other 12 rps3 transcripts, lacks editing in the exonic regions around the intron. Provided that the loss of editing preceded the loss of rps3 intron, it appears conceivable that a requirement for editing could have prevented the loss of group II introns retained in angiosperm mitochondrial genomes. This interpretation is an alternative to the conventional one that views the loss of editing as a mere trace of RNA-mediated gene conversion.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome→Same topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms→French-language works237,207→