MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131618108 · doi:10.1093/gbe/evu206

“Out of Pollen” Hypothesis for Origin of New Genes in Flowering Plants: Study from Arabidopsis thaliana

2014· letter· en· W2131618108 on OpenAlexaff
Dong‐Dong Wu, Xin Wang, Yan Li, Lin Zeng, David M. Irwin, Ya‐Ping Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome Biology and Evolution · 2014
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Reproductive Biology
Canadian institutionsDiabetes CanadaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyArabidopsis thalianaPollenArabidopsisGeneBotanyFlowering plantEvolutionary biologyGeneticsMutant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New genes, which provide material for evolutionary innovation, have been extensively studied for many years in animals where it is observed that they commonly show an expression bias for the testis. Thus, the testis is a major source for the generation of new genes in animals. The source tissue for new genes in plants is unclear. Here, we find that new genes in plants show a bias in expression to mature pollen, and are also enriched in a gene coexpression module that correlates with mature pollen in Arabidopsis thaliana. Transposable elements are significantly enriched in the new genes, and the high activity of transposable elements in the vegetative nucleus, compared with the germ cells, suggests that new genes are most easily generated in the vegetative nucleus in the mature pollen. We propose an "out of pollen" hypothesis for the origin of new genes in flowering plants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations39
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome Biology and EvolutionSame topicPlant Reproductive BiologyFrench-language works237,207