MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809300200 · doi:10.1093/gbe/evy123

Rates and Patterns of Mutation in Tandem Repetitive DNA in Six Independent Lineages of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii

2018· article· en· W2809300200 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jullien M. Flynn, Sarah E. Lower, Daniel A. Barbash, Andrew G. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome Biology and Evolution · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBiologyChlamydomonas reinhardtiiChlamydomonasEvolutionary biologyGeneticsMutationTandem repeatMutation rateDNAComputational biologyGeneGenomeMutant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mutational patterns of large tandem arrays of short sequence repeats remain largely unknown, despite observations of their high levels of variation in sequence and genomic abundance within and between species. Many factors can influence the dynamics of tandem repeat evolution; however, their evolution has only been examined over a limited phylogenetic sample of taxa. Here, we use publicly available whole-genome sequencing data of 85 haploid mutation accumulation lines derived from six geographically diverse Chlamydomonas reinhardtii isolates to investigate genome-wide mutation rates and patterns in tandem repeats in this species. We find that tandem repeat composition differs among ancestral strains, both in genome-wide abundance and presence/absence of individual repeats. Estimated mutation rates (repeat copy number expansion and contraction) were high, averaging 4.3×10-4 per generation per single unit copy. Although orders of magnitude higher than other types of mutation previously reported in C. reinhardtii, these tandem repeat mutation rates were one order of magnitude lower than what has recently been found in Daphnia pulex, even after correcting for lower overall genome-wide satellite abundance in C. reinhardtii. Most high-abundance repeats were related to others by a single mutational step. Correlations of repeat copy number changes within genomes revealed clusters of closely related repeats that were strongly correlated positively or negatively, and similar patterns of correlation arose independently in two different mutation accumulation experiments. Together, these results paint a dynamic picture of tandem repeat evolution in this unicellular alga.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome Biology and EvolutionSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207