Recursive Paleohexaploidization Shaped the Durian Genome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
spp.). Here, we reanalyzed the durian genome in comparison with other well-characterized genomes. We found that durian and cotton were actually affected by different polyploidization events: hexaploidization in durian ∼19-21 million years ago (mya) and decaploidization in cotton ∼13-14 mya. Previous interpretations of shared polyploidization events may have resulted from the elevated evolutionary rates in cotton genes due to the decaploidization and insufficient consideration of the complexity of plant genomes. The decaploidization elevated evolutionary rates of cotton genes by ∼64% compared to durian and explained a previous ∼4-fold over dating of the event. In contrast, the hexaploidization in durian did not prominently elevate gene evolutionary rates, likely due to its long generation time. Moreover, divergent evolutionary rates probably explain 98.4% of reconstructed phylogenetic trees of homologous genes being incongruent with expected topology. The findings provide further insight into the roles played by polypoidization in the evolution of genomes and genes, and they suggest revisiting existing reconstructed phylogenetic trees.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".