MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The sunflower (<i>Helianthus annuus</i> L.) genome reflects a recent history of biased accumulation of transposable elements

2012· article· en· W2096952033 on OpenAlexaff
S. Evan Staton, Bradley Hartman Bakken, Benjamin K. Blackman, Mark A. Chapman, Nolan C. Kane, Shunxue Tang, Mark C. Ungerer, Steven J. Knapp, Loren H. Rieseberg, John M. Burke

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Plant Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicChromosomal and Genetic Variations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetrotransposonTransposable elementBiologyGenomeGeneticsLong terminal repeatGenome evolutionHelianthus annuusGenome sizeEvolutionary biologySunflowerGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aside from polyploidy, transposable elements are the major drivers of genome size increases in plants. Thus, understanding the diversity and evolutionary dynamics of transposable elements in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.), especially given its large genome size (∼3.5 Gb) and the well-documented cases of amplification of certain transposons within the genus, is of considerable importance for understanding the evolutionary history of this emerging model species. By analyzing approximately 25% of the sunflower genome from random sequence reads and assembled bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) clones, we show that it is composed of over 81% transposable elements, 77% of which are long terminal repeat (LTR) retrotransposons. Moreover, the LTR retrotransposon fraction in BAC clones harboring genes is disproportionately composed of chromodomain-containing Gypsy LTR retrotransposons ('chromoviruses'), and the majority of the intact chromoviruses contain tandem chromodomain duplications. We show that there is a bias in the efficacy of homologous recombination in removing LTR retrotransposon DNA, thereby providing insight into the mechanisms associated with transposable element (TE) composition in the sunflower genome. We also show that the vast majority of observed LTR retrotransposon insertions have likely occurred since the origin of this species, providing further evidence that biased LTR retrotransposon activity has played a major role in shaping the chromatin and DNA landscape of the sunflower genome. Although our findings on LTR retrotransposon age and structure could be influenced by the selection of the BAC clones analyzed, a global analysis of random sequence reads indicates that the evolutionary patterns described herein apply to the sunflower genome as a whole.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations103
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Plant JournalSame topicChromosomal and Genetic VariationsFrench-language works237,207