Functional and morphological evolution in gymnosperms: A portrait of implicated gene families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Gymnosperms diverged from their sister plant clade of flowering plants 300 Mya. Morphological and functional divergence between the two major seed plant clades involved significant changes in their reproductive biology, water‐conducting systems, secondary metabolism, stress defense mechanisms, and small RNA‐mediated epigenetic silencing. The relatively recent sequencing of several gymnosperm genomes and the development of new genomic resources have enabled whole‐genome comparisons within gymnosperms, and between angiosperms and gymnosperms. In this paper, we aim to understand how genes and gene families have contributed to the major functional and morphological differences in gymnosperms, and how this information can be used for applied breeding and biotechnology. In addition, we have analyzed the angiosperm versus gymnosperm evolution of the pleiotropic drug resistance (PDR) gene family with a wide range of functionalities in plants' interaction with their environment including defense mechanisms. Some of the genes reviewed here are newly studied members of gene families that hold potential for biotechnological applications related to commercial and pharmacological value. Some members of conifer gene families can also be exploited for their potential in phytoremediation applications.
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 | 0.000 | 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".