MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2534566231 · doi:10.7717/peerj.2627

Proliferation of group II introns in the chloroplast genome of the green alga <i>Oedocladium carolinianum</i> (Chlorophyceae)

2016· article· en· W2534566231 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean‐Simon Brouard, Monique Turmel, Christian Otis, Claude Lemieux

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyChloroplast DNAChlorophyceaeGenomeCladeGroup II intronGenePhylogenetic treeGreen algaeIntronGeneticsChlorophytaInverted repeatEvolutionary biologyBotanyAlgaeRNA splicingRNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The chloroplast genome sustained extensive changes in architecture during the evolution of the Chlorophyceae, a morphologically and ecologically diverse class of green algae belonging to the Chlorophyta; however, the forces driving these changes are poorly understood. The five orders recognized in the Chlorophyceae form two major clades: the CS clade consisting of the Chlamydomonadales and Sphaeropleales, and the OCC clade consisting of the Oedogoniales, Chaetophorales, and Chaetopeltidales. In the OCC clade, considerable variations in chloroplast DNA (cpDNA) structure, size, gene order, and intron content have been observed. The large inverted repeat (IR), an ancestral feature characteristic of most green plants, is present in Oedogonium cardiacum (Oedogoniales) but is lacking in the examined members of the Chaetophorales and Chaetopeltidales. Remarkably, the Oedogonium 35.5-kb IR houses genes that were putatively acquired through horizontal DNA transfer. To better understand the dynamics of chloroplast genome evolution in the Oedogoniales, we analyzed the cpDNA of a second representative of this order, Oedocladium carolinianum . Methods The Oedocladium cpDNA was sequenced and annotated. The evolutionary distances separating Oedocladium and Oedogonium cpDNAs and two other pairs of chlorophycean cpDNAs were estimated using a 61-gene data set. Phylogenetic analysis of an alignment of group IIA introns from members of the OCC clade was performed. Secondary structures and insertion sites of oedogonialean group IIA introns were analyzed. Results The 204,438-bp Oedocladium genome is 7.9 kb larger than the Oedogonium genome, but its repertoire of conserved genes is remarkably similar and gene order differs by only one reversal. Although the 23.7-kb IR is missing the putative foreign genes found in Oedogonium , it contains sequences coding for a putative phage or bacterial DNA primase and a hypothetical protein. Intergenic sequences are 1.5-fold longer and dispersed repeats are more abundant, but a smaller fraction of the Oedocladium genome is occupied by introns. Six additional group II introns are present, five of which lack ORFs and carry highly similar sequences to that of the ORF-less IIA intron shared with Oedogonium . Secondary structure analysis of the group IIA introns disclosed marked differences in the exon-binding sites; however, each intron showed perfect or nearly perfect base pairing interactions with its target site. Discussion Our results suggest that chloroplast genes rearrange more slowly in the Oedogoniales than in the Chaetophorales and raise questions as to what was the nature of the foreign coding sequences in the IR of the common ancestor of the Oedogoniales. They provide the first evidence for intragenomic proliferation of group IIA introns in the Viridiplantae, revealing that intron spread in the Oedocladium lineage likely occurred by retrohoming after sequence divergence of the exon-binding 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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations40
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207