Insight into the Recent Genome Duplication of the Halophilic Yeast <i>Hortaea werneckii</i>: Combining an Improved Genome with Gene Expression and Chromatin Structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Extremophilic organisms demonstrate the flexibility and adaptability of basic biological processes by highlighting how cell physiology adapts to environmental extremes. Few eukaryotic extremophiles have been well studied and only a small number are amenable to laboratory cultivation and manipulation. A detailed characterization of the genome architecture of such organisms is important to illuminate how they adapt to environmental stresses. One excellent example of a fungal extremophile is the halophile Hortaea werneckii (Pezizomycotina, Dothideomycetes, Capnodiales), a yeast-like fungus able to thrive at near-saturating concentrations of sodium chloride and which is also tolerant to both UV irradiation and desiccation. Given its unique lifestyle and its remarkably recent whole genome duplication, H. werneckii provides opportunities for testing the role of genome duplications and adaptability to extreme environments. We previously assembled the genome of H. werneckii using short-read sequencing technology and found a remarkable degree of gene duplication. Technology limitations, however, precluded high-confidence annotation of the entire genome. We therefore revisited the H. wernickii genome using long-read, single-molecule sequencing and provide an improved genome assembly which, combined with transcriptome and nucleosome analysis, provides a useful resource for fungal halophile genomics. Remarkably, the ∼50 Mb H. wernickii genome contains 15,974 genes of which 95% (7608) are duplicates formed by a recent whole genome duplication (WGD), with an average of 5% protein sequence divergence between them. We found that the WGD is extraordinarily recent, and compared to Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the majority of the genome’s ohnologs have not diverged at the level of gene expression of chromatin structure.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".