Structural variation and rates of genome evolution in the grass family seen through comparison of sequences of genomes greatly differing in size
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Homology was searched with genes annotated in the Aegilops tauschii pseudomolecules against genes annotated in the pseudomolecules of tetraploid wild emmer wheat, Brachypodium distachyon, sorghum and rice. Similar searches were performed with genes annotated in the rice pseudomolecules. Matrices of collinear genes and rearrangements in their order were constructed. Optical BioNano genome maps were constructed and used to validate rearrangements unique to the wild emmer and Ae. tauschii genomes. Most common rearrangements were short paracentric inversions and short intrachromosomal translocations. Intrachromosomal translocations outnumbered segmental intrachromosomal duplications. The densities of paracentric inversion lengths were approximated by exponential distributions in all six genomes. Densities of collinear genes along the Ae. tauschii chromosomes were highly correlated with meiotic recombination rates but those of rearrangements were not, suggesting different causes of the erosion of gene collinearity and evolution of major chromosome rearrangements. Frequent rearrangements sharing breakpoints suggested that chromosomes have been rearranged recurrently at some sites. The distal 4 Mb of the short arms of rice chromosomes Os11 and Os12 and corresponding regions in the sorghum, B. distachyon and Triticeae genomes contain clusters of interstitial translocations including from 1 to 7 collinear genes. The rates of acquisition of major rearrangements were greater in the large wild emmer wheat and Ae. tauschii genomes than in the lineage preceding their divergence or in the B. distachyon, rice and sorghum lineages. It is suggested that synergy between large quantities of dynamic transposable elements and annual growth habit have been the primary causes of the fast evolution of the Triticeae genomes.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".