MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Identification of Three Distinct <i>Polytomella</i> Lineages Based on Mitochondrial DNA Features

2006· article· en· W2132332231 on OpenAlexafffund
Martin A. Mallet, W. Robert Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eukaryotic Microbiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAlgal biology and biofuel production
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDalhousie UniversityAbbott Laboratories
KeywordsBiologyMitochondrial DNALineage (genetic)Chlamydomonas reinhardtiiPhylogenetic treeEvolutionary biologyGeneticsPhylogeneticsGeneMutant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polytomella is composed of colorless green algae closely related to Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. Species in the genus have been used in diverse fields of biological research, most recently to study mitochondrial function and mitochondrial genome evolution in the Chlorophyceae, but the phylogenetic relationship between the various available taxa has not yet been clarified and it is not known whether they also possess fragmented mitochondrial genomes, as reported for Polytomella parva. We therefore examined cox1 sequence from seven Polytomella taxa with the goal of establishing their phylogenetic relationships and relating this information to their mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) fragmentation pattern. We found that the Polytomella isolates examined fall into three distinct lineages, two of which possess fragmented mitochondrial genomes. The third and earliest branching lineage, represented by Polytomella capuana, appears to possess an intact mtDNA. In addition, there is evidence for variation in both size and number of mtDNA fragments between various Polytomella isolates, even within the same lineage. The considerable amount of sequence divergence between lineages seems to correlate with the geographic origin of the strains, leading us to believe that greater amounts of sequence divergence could be uncovered by a broader sampling of Polytomella.

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 score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations20
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Eukaryotic MicrobiologySame topicAlgal biology and biofuel productionFrench-language works237,207