MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111193138 · doi:10.1534/genetics.108.099283

Germline Expression Influences Operon Organization in the <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i> Genome

2009· article· en· W2111193138 on OpenAlexaff
V Reinke, Asher D. Cutter

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCaenorhabditis elegansBiologyGeneticsOperonGermlineGenomeCaenorhabditisGenomic organizationGeneEscherichia coli

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Operons are found across multiple kingdoms and phyla, from prokaryotes to chordates. In the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans, the genome contains >1000 operons that compose approximately 15% of the protein-coding genes. However, determination of the force(s) promoting the origin and maintenance of operons in C. elegans has proved elusive. Compared to bacterial operons, genes within a C. elegans operon often show poor coexpression and only sometimes encode proteins with related functions. Using analysis of microarray and large-scale in situ hybridization data, we demonstrate that almost all operon-encoded genes are expressed in germline tissue. However, genes expressed during spermatogenesis are excluded from operons. Operons group together along chromosomes in local clusters that also contain monocistronic germline-expressed genes. Additionally, germline expression of genes in operons is largely independent of the molecular function of the encoded proteins. These analyses demonstrate that mechanisms governing germline gene expression influence operon origination and/or maintenance. Thus, gene expression in a specific tissue can have profound effects on the evolution of genome organization.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations45
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneticsSame topicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model OrganismsFrench-language works237,207