MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122286831 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2021.102084

Draft genome sequence of the Antarctic green alga Chlamydomonas sp. UWO241

2021· article· en· W3122286831 on OpenAlexafffund
Xi Zhang, Marina Cvetkovska, Rachael M. Morgan‐Kiss, Norman P. A. Hüner, David Roy Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAlgal biology and biofuel production
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChlamydomonasGreen algaeBotanyWhole genome sequencingPlant scienceBiologyGenomeChlorophytaAlgaeGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Antarctica is home to an assortment of psychrophilic algae, which have evolved various survival strategies for coping with their frigid environments. Here, we explore Antarctic psychrophily by examining the ∼212 Mb draft nuclear genome of the green alga Chlamydomonas sp. UWO241, which resides within the water column of a perennially ice-covered, hypersaline lake. Like certain other Antarctic algae, UWO241 encodes a large number (≥37) of ice-binding proteins, putatively originating from horizontal gene transfer. Even more striking, UWO241 harbors hundreds of highly similar duplicated genes involved in diverse cellular processes, some of which we argue are aiding its survival in the Antarctic via gene dosage. Gene and partial gene duplication appear to be an ongoing phenomenon within UWO241, one which might be mediated by retrotransposons. Ultimately, we consider how such a process could be associated with adaptation to extreme environments but explore potential non-adaptive hypotheses as well.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.008

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations42
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicAlgal biology and biofuel productionFrench-language works237,207