MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087875288 · doi:10.1186/1471-2148-7-172

The dinoflagellates Durinskia baltica and Kryptoperidinium foliaceum retain functionally overlapping mitochondria from two evolutionarily distinct lineages

2007· article· en· W2087875288 on OpenAlexafffund
Behzad Imanian, Patrick J. Keeling

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Evolutionary Biology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtist diversity and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsBiologyDinoflagellateMitochondrial DNAPlastidMitochondrionGeneGenomeAlternative oxidaseOrganelleGeneticsCytochrome c oxidaseCell biologyChloroplastBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The dinoflagellates Durinskia baltica and Kryptoperidinium foliaceum are distinguished by the presence of a tertiary plastid derived from a diatom endosymbiont. The diatom is fully integrated with the host cell cycle and is so altered in structure as to be difficult to recognize it as a diatom, and yet it retains a number of features normally lost in tertiary and secondary endosymbionts, most notably mitochondria. The dinoflagellate host is also reported to retain mitochondrion-like structures, making these cells unique in retaining two evolutionarily distinct mitochondria. This redundancy raises the question of whether the organelles share any functions in common or have distributed functions between them. RESULTS: We show that both host and endosymbiont mitochondrial genomes encode genes for electron transport proteins. We have characterized cytochrome c oxidase 1 (cox1), cytochrome oxidase 2 (cox2), cytochrome oxidase 3 (cox3), cytochrome b (cob), and large subunit of ribosomal RNA (LSUrRNA) of endosymbiont mitochondrial ancestry, and cox1 and cob of host mitochondrial ancestry. We show that all genes are transcribed and that those ascribed to the host mitochondrial genome are extensively edited at the RNA level, as expected for a dinoflagellate mitochondrion-encoded gene. We also found evidence for extensive recombination in the host mitochondrial genes and that recombination products are also transcribed, as expected for a dinoflagellate. CONCLUSION: Durinskia baltica and K. foliaceum retain two mitochondria from evolutionarily distinct lineages, and the functions of these organelles are at least partially overlapping, since both express genes for proteins in electron transport.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.846

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations63
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Evolutionary BiologySame topicProtist diversity and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207