Chromosome-Level Genome Assemblies of Two Hypnales (Mosses) Reveal High Intergeneric Synteny
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mosses compose one of the three lineages of bryophytes. Today, about 13,000 species of mosses are recognized from across the globe, and at least one-third of this diversity composes the Hypnales, a lineage characterized by an early rapid radiation. We sequenced and de novo assembled the genomes of two hypnalean mosses, namely Entodon seductrix and Hypnum curvifolium, based on the 10x genomics and Hi-C data. The genome assemblies of E. seductrix and H. curvifolium comprise 348.4 and 262.0 Mb, respectively, estimated by k-mer analyses to represent 93.3% and 97.2% of their total genome size. Both genomes were assembled at the chromosome level, with scaffold N50 of 30.0 and 20.7 Mb, respectively. The annotated genome of E. seductrix comprises 25,801 protein-coding genes and that of H. curvifolium 29,077, estimated to represent 96.8% and 97.2%, respectively, of the total gene spaces based on BUSCO (Benchmarking Universal Single-Copy Ortholog) assessment. For both genomes, most contigs were anchored to the largest 11 pseudomolecules, corresponding to the 11 chromosomes of the two species, and each with a putative sex-related chromosome characterized by low gene density. The chromosomes of E. seductrix and H. curvifolium are highly syntenic, suggests limited architectural shifts occurred following the rapid radiation of the Hypnales. We compared their genomic features to the model moss Physcomitrium patens. The hypnalean moss genomes lack signatures of recent whole-genome duplication. The presented high-quality moss genomes provide new resources for comparative genomics to potentially unveil the genomic evolution of derived moss lineages.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".