Variation in Plastome Sizes Accompanied by Evolutionary History in Monogenomic Triticeae (Poaceae: Triticeae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate the pattern of chloroplast genome variation in Triticeae, we comprehensively analyzed the indels in protein-coding genes and intergenic sequence, gene loss/pseudonization, intron variation, expansion/contraction in inverted repeat regions, and the relationship between sequence characteristics and chloroplast genome size in 34 monogenomic Triticeae plants. Ancestral genome reconstruction suggests that major length variations occurred in four-stem branches of monogenomic Triticeae followed by independent changes in each genus. It was shown that the chloroplast genome sizes of monogenomic Triticeae were highly variable. The chloroplast genome of Pseudoroegneria, Dasypyrum, Lophopyrum, Thinopyrum, Eremopyrum, Agropyron, Australopyrum, and Henradia in Triticeae had evolved toward size reduction largely because of pseudogenes elimination events and length deletion fragments in intergenic. The Aegilops/Triticum complex, Taeniatherum, Secale, Crithopsis, Herteranthelium, and Hordeum in Triticeae had a larger chloroplast genome size. The large size variation in major lineages and their subclades are most likely consequences of adaptive processes since these variations were significantly correlated with divergence time and historical climatic changes. We also found that several intergenic regions, such as petN–trnC and psbE–petL containing unique genetic information, which can be used as important tools to identify the maternal relationship among Triticeae species. Our results contribute to the novel knowledge of plastid genome evolution in Triticeae.
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".