An 82 bp tandem repeat family typical of 3′ non-coding end of Gypsy/TAT LTR retrotransposons is conserved in <i>Coffea</i> spp. pericentromeres
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coffea spp. chromosomes are very small and accumulate a variety of repetitive DNA families around the centromeres. However, the proximal regions of Coffea chromosomes remain poorly understood, especially regarding the nature and organisation of the sequences. Taking advantage of the genome sequences of C. arabica (2n = 44), C. canephora, and C. eugenioides (C. arabica progenitors with 2n = 22) and good coverage genome sequencing of dozens of other wild Coffea spp., repetitive DNA sequences were identified, and the genomes were compared to decipher particularities of pericentromeric structures. The searches revealed a short tandem repeat (82 bp length) typical of Gypsy/TAT LTR retrotransposons, named Coffea_sat11. This repeat organises clusters with fragments of other transposable elements, comprising regions of non-coding RNA production. Cytogenomic analyses showed that Coffea_sat11 extends from the pericentromeres towards the middle of the chromosomal arms. This arrangement was observed in the allotetraploid C. arabica chromosomes, as well as in its progenitors. This study improves our understanding of the role of the Gypsy/TAT LTR retrotransposon lineage in the organisation of Coffea pericentromeres, as well as the conservation of Coffea_sat11 within the genus. The relationships between fragments of other transposable elements and the functional aspects of these sequences on the pericentromere chromatin were also evaluated. Highlights: A scattered short tandem repeat, typical of Gypsy/TAT LTR retrotransposons, associated with several fragments of other transposable elements, accumulates in the pericentromeres of Coffea chromosomes. This arrangement is preserved in all clades of the genus and appears to have a strong regulatory role in the organisation of chromatin around centromeres.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".