Evolution in the block: common elements of 5S rDNA organization and evolutionary patterns in distant fish genera
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 5S rDNA is organized in the genome as tandemly repeated copies of a structural unit composed of a coding sequence plus a nontranscribed spacer (NTS). The coding region is highly conserved in the evolution, whereas the NTS vary in both length and sequence. It has been proposed that 5S rRNA genes are members of a gene family that have arisen through concerted evolution. In this study, we describe the molecular organization and evolution of the 5S rDNA in the genera Lepidorhombus and Scophthalmus (Scophthalmidae) and compared it with already known 5S rDNA of the very different genera Merluccius (Merluccidae) and Salmo (Salmoninae), to identify common structural elements or patterns for understanding 5S rDNA evolution in fish. High intra- and interspecific diversity within the 5S rDNA family in all the genera can be explained by a combination of duplications, deletions, and transposition events. Sequence blocks with high similarity in all the 5S rDNA members across species were identified for the four studied genera, with evidences of intense gene conversion within noncoding regions. We propose a model to explain the evolution of the 5S rDNA, in which the evolutionary units are blocks of nucleotides rather than the entire sequences or single nucleotides. This model implies a "two-speed" evolution: slow within blocks (homogenized by recombination) and fast within the gene family (diversified by duplications and deletions).
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".