<i>De novo</i> assembly of 20 chickens reveals the undetectable phenomenon for thousands of core genes on sub-telomeric regions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The gene numbers and evolutionary rates of birds were assumed to be much lower than that of mammals, which in sharp contrast to the huge species number and morphological diversity of birds. It is very necessary to construct a complete avian genome and analyze its evolution.We constructed a chicken pan-genome from 20 de novo genome assemblies with high sequencing depth, newly identified 1,335 protein-coding genes and 3,011 long noncoding RNAs. The majority of these novel genes were detected across most individuals of the examined transcriptomes but were accidentally measured in each of the DNA sequencing data regardless of Illumina or PacBio technology. Furthermore, different from previous pan-genome models, most of these novel genes were overrepresented on chromosomal sub-telomeric regions, surrounded with extremely high proportions of tandem repeats, and strongly blocked DNA sequencing. These hidden genes were proved to be shared by all chicken genomes, included many housekeeping genes, and enriched in immune pathways. Comparative genomics revealed the novel genes had three-fold elevated substitution rates than known ones, updating the evolutionary rates of birds. Our study provides a framework for constructing a better chicken genome, which will contribute towards the understanding of avian evolution and improvement of poultry breeding.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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".