High Rate of Recent Intron Gain and Loss in Simultaneously Duplicated Arabidopsis Genes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the gene structure of a set of 2563 Arabidopsis thaliana paralogous pairs that were duplicated simultaneously 20-60 MYA by tetraploidy. Out of a total of 23,164 introns in these genes, we found that 10,004 pairs have been conserved and 578 introns have been inserted or deleted in the time since the duplication event. This intron insertion/deletion rate of 2.7 x 10(-3) to 9.1 x 10(-4) per site per million years is high in comparison to previous studies. At least 56 introns were gained and 39 lost based on parsimony analysis of the phylogenetic distribution of these introns. We found weak evidence that genes undergoing intron gain and loss are biased with respect to gene ontology terms. Gene pairs that experienced at least 2 intron insertions or deletions show evidence of enrichment for membrane location and transport and transporter activity function. We do not find any relationship of intron flux to expression level or G + C content of the gene. Detection of a bias in the location of intron gains and losses within a gene depends on the method of measurement: an intragene method indicates that events (specifically intron losses) are biased toward the 3' end of the gene. Despite the relatively recent acquisition of these introns, we found only one case where we could identify the mechanism of intron origin--the TOUCH3 gene has experienced 2 tandem, partial, internal gene duplications that duplicated a preexisting intron and also created a novel, alternatively spliced intron that makes use of a duplicated pair of cryptic splice sites.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".