MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2583607119 · doi:10.1080/19420889.2017.1283080

The plastid genomes of nonphotosynthetic algae are not so small after all

2017· letter· en· W2583607119 on OpenAlex
Francisco Figueroa‐Martinez, Aurora M. Nedelcu, Adrián Reyes‐Prieto, David Roy Smith

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunicative & Integrative Biology · 2017
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Parasitism and Resistance
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlastidBiologyGenomeChloroplast DNAAlgaePhotosynthesisEvolutionary biologyChloroplastGreen algaeBotanyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The thing about plastid genomes in nonphotosynthetic plants and algae is that they are usually very small and highly compact. This is not surprising: a heterotrophic existence means that genes for photosynthesis can be easily discarded. But the loss of photosynthesis cannot explain why the plastomes of heterotrophs are so often depauperate in noncoding DNA. If plastid genomes from photosynthetic taxa can span the gamut of compactness, why can't those of nonphotosynthetic species? Well, recently we showed that they can. The free-living, heterotrophic green alga Polytoma uvella has a plastid genome boasting more than 165 kilobases of noncoding DNA, making it the most bloated plastome yet found in a heterotroph. In this addendum to the primary study, we elaborate on why the P. uvella plastome is so inflated, discussing the potential impact of a free-living vs. parasitic lifestyle on plastid genome expansion in nonphotosynthetic lineages.

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 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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.224 · 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