Evolution of duplicated growth hormone genes in autotetraploid salmonid fishes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A defining character of the piscine family Salmonidae is autotetraploidy resulting from a genome-doubling event some 25-100 million years ago. Initially, duplicated genes may have undergone concerted evolution and tetrasomic inheritance. Homeologous chromosomes eventually diverged and the resulting reduction in recombination and gene conversion between paralogous genes allowed the re-establishment of disomic inheritance. Among extant salmonine fishes (e.g. salmon, trout, char) the growth hormone (GH) gene is generally represented by two functional paralogs, GH1 and GH2. Sequence analyses of salmonid GH genes from species of subfamilies Coregoninae (whitefish, ciscos) and Salmoninae were used to examine the evolutionary history of the duplicated GH genes. Two divergent GH gene paralogs were also identified in Coregoninae, but they were not assignable to the GH1 and GH2 categories. The average sequence divergence between the coregonine GH genes was more than twofold lower than the corresponding divergence between the salmonine GH1 and GH2. Phylogenetic analysis of the coregonine GH paralogs did not resolve their relationship to the salmonine paralogs. These findings suggest that disomic inheritance of two GH genes was established by different mechanisms in these two subfamilies.
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".