Phylogenetic determination of the pace of transposable element proliferation in plants: <i>copia</i> and LINE-like elements in <i>Gossypium</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transposable elements contribute significantly to plant genome evolution in myriad ways, ranging from local insertional mutations to global effects exerted on genome size through accumulation. Differential accumulation and deletion of transposable elements may profoundly affect genome size, even among members of the same genus. One example is that of Gossypium (cotton), where much of the 3-fold genome size variation is due to differential accumulation of one gypsy-like LTR retrotransposon, Gorge3. Copia and non-LTR LINE retrotransposons are also major components of the Gossypium genome, but unlike Gorge3, their extant copy numbers do not correlate with genome size. In the present study, we describe the nature and timing of transposition for copia and LINE retrotransposons in Gossypium. Our findings indicate that copia retrotransposons have been active in each lineage since divergence from a common ancestor, and that they have proliferated in a punctuated manner. However, the evolutionary history of LINEs contrasts markedly with that of the copia retrotransposons. Although LINEs have also been active in each lineage, they have accumulated in a stochastically regular manner, and phylogenetic analysis suggests that extant LINE populations in Gossypium are dominated by ancient insertions. Interestingly, the magnitude of transpositional bursts in each lineage corresponds directly with extant estimated copy number.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".