Comparative Mitogenomics of Leeches (Annelida: Clitellata): Genome Conservation and Placobdella-Specific trnD Gene Duplication
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mitochondrial DNA sequences, often in combination with nuclear markers and morphological data, are frequently used to unravel the phylogenetic relationships, population dynamics and biogeographic histories of a plethora of organisms. The information provided by examining complete mitochondrial genomes also enables investigation of other evolutionary events such as gene rearrangements, gene duplication and gene loss. Despite efforts to generate information to represent most of the currently recognized groups, some taxa are underrepresented in mitochondrial genomic databases. One such group is leeches (Annelida: Hirudinea: Clitellata). Herein, we expand our knowledge concerning leech mitochondrial makeup including gene arrangement, gene duplication and the evolution of mitochondrial genomes by adding newly sequenced mitochondrial genomes for three bloodfeeding species: Haementeria officinalis, Placobdella lamothei and Placobdella parasitica. With the inclusion of three new mitochondrial genomes of leeches, a better understanding of evolution for this organelle within the group is emerging. We found that gene order and genomic arrangement in the three new mitochondrial genomes is identical to previously sequenced members of Clitellata. Interestingly, within Placobdella, we recovered a genus-specific duplication of the trnD gene located between cox2 and atp8. We performed phylogenetic analyses using 12 protein-coding genes and expanded our taxon sampling by including GenBank sequences for 39 taxa; the analyses confirm the monophyletic status of Clitellata, yet disagree in several respects with other phylogenetic hypotheses based on morphology and analyses of non-mitochondrial data.
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.
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 it