Complete Sequence and Analysis of the Mitochondrial Genome of Hemiselmis andersenii CCMP644 (Cryptophyceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cryptophytes are an enigmatic group of unicellular eukaryotes with plastids derived by secondary (i.e., eukaryote-eukaryote) endosymbiosis. Cryptophytes are unusual in that they possess four genomes-a host cell-derived nuclear and mitochondrial genome and an endosymbiont-derived plastid and 'nucleomorph' genome. The evolutionary origins of the host and endosymbiont components of cryptophyte algae are at present poorly understood. Thus far, a single complete mitochondrial genome sequence has been determined for the cryptophyte Rhodomonas salina. Here, the second complete mitochondrial genome of the cryptophyte alga Hemiselmis andersenii CCMP644 is presented. RESULTS: The H. andersenii mtDNA is 60,553 bp in size and encodes 30 structural RNAs and 36 protein-coding genes, all located on the same strand. A prominent feature of the genome is the presence of a approximately 20 Kbp long intergenic region comprised of numerous tandem and dispersed repeat units of between 22-336 bp. Adjacent to these repeats are 27 copies of palindromic sequences predicted to form stable DNA stem-loop structures. One such stem-loop is located near a GC-rich and GC-poor region and may have a regulatory function in replication or transcription. The H. andersenii mtDNA shares a number of features in common with the genome of the cryptophyte Rhodomonas salina, including general architecture, gene content, and the presence of a large repeat region. However, the H. andersenii mtDNA is devoid of inverted repeats and introns, which are present in R. salina. Comparative analyses of the suite of tRNAs encoded in the two genomes reveal that the H. andersenii mtDNA has lost or converted its original trnK(uuu) gene and possesses a trnS-derived 'trnK(uuu)', which appears unable to produce a functional tRNA. Mitochondrial protein coding gene phylogenies strongly support a variety of previously established eukaryotic groups, but fail to resolve the relationships among higher-order eukaryotic lineages. CONCLUSION: Comparison of the H. andersenii and R. salina mitochondrial genomes reveals a number of cryptophyte-specific genomic features, most notably the presence of a large repeat-rich intergenic region. However, unlike R. salina, the H. andersenii mtDNA does not possess introns and lacks a Lys-tRNA, which is presumably imported from the cytosol.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".