Genome-wide comparative analysis of transposable elements in Palmae genomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Transposable elements (TEs) are the largest component of the genetic material of most eukaryotes and can play roles in shaping genome architecture and regulating phenotypic variation; thus, understanding genome evolution is only possible if we comprehend the contributions of TEs. However, the quantitative and qualitative contributions of TEs can vary, even between closely related lineages. For palm species, in particular, the dynamics of the process through which TEs have differently shaped their genomes remains poorly understood because of a lack of comparative studies. Materials and methods: We conducted a genome-wide comparative analysis of palm TEs, focusing on identifying and classifying TEs using the draft assemblies of four palm species: Phoenix dactylifera, Cocos nucifera, Calamus simplicifolius, and Elaeis oleifera. Our TE library was generated using both de novo structure-based and homology-based methodologies. Results: The generated libraries revealed the TE component of each assembly, which varied from 41–81%. Class I retrotransposons covered 36–75% of these species’ draft genome sequences and primarily consisted of LTR retroelements, while non-LTR elements covered about 0.56–2.31% of each assembly, mainly as LINEs. The least represented were Class DNA transposons, comprising 1.87–3.37%. Conclusion: The current study contributes to a detailed identification and characterization of transposable elements in Palmae draft genome assemblies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".