Relative Mutation Rates in Nucleomorph-Bearing Algae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chlorarachniophyte and cryptophyte algae are unique among plastid-containing species in that they have a nucleomorph genome: a compact, highly reduced nuclear genome from a photosynthetic eukaryotic endosymbiont. Despite their independent origins, the nucleomorph genomes of these two lineages have similar genomic architectures, but little is known about the evolutionary pressures impacting nucleomorph DNA, particularly how their rates of evolution compare to those of the neighboring genetic compartments (the mitochondrion, plastid, and nucleus). Here, we use synonymous substitution rates to estimate relative mutation rates in the four genomes of nucleomorph-bearing algae. We show that the relative mutation rates of the host versus endosymbiont nuclear genomes are similar in both chlorarachniophytes and cryptophytes, despite the fact that nucleomorph gene sequences are notoriously highly divergent. There is some evidence, however, for slightly elevated mutation rates in the nucleomorph DNA of chlorarachniophytes-a feature not observed in that of cryptophytes. For both lineages, relative mutation rates in the plastid appear to be lower than those in the nucleus and nucleomorph (and, in one case, the mitochondrion), which is consistent with studies of other plastid-bearing protists. Given the divergent nature of nucleomorph genes, our finding of relatively low evolutionary rates in these genomes suggests that for both lineages a burst of evolutionary change and/or decreased selection pressures likely occurred early in the integration of the secondary endosymbiont.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".