Origin and early evolution of the plant terpene synthase family
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a midsized gene family conserved more by lineage than function, the typical plant terpene synthases (TPSs) could be a valuable tool to examine plant evolution. TPSs are pivotal in biosynthesis of gibberellins and related phytohormones as well as in formation of the extensive arsenal of specialized plant metabolites mediating ecological interactions whose production is often lineage specific. Yet the origin and early evolution of the TPS family is not well understood. Systematic analysis of an array of transcriptomes and sequenced genomes indicated that the TPS family originated after the divergence of land plants from charophytic algae. Phylogenetic and biochemical analyses support the hypothesis that the ancestral TPS gene encoded a bifunctional class I and II diterpene synthase producing the ent-kaurene required for phytohormone production in all extant lineages of land plants. Moreover, the ancestral TPS gene likely underwent duplication at least twice early in land plant evolution. Together these two gave rise to three TPS lineages leading to the extant TPS-c, TPS-e/f, and the remaining TPS (h/d/a/b/g) subfamilies, with the latter dedicated to secondary rather than primary metabolism while the former two contain those genes involved in ent-kaurene production. Nevertheless, parallel evolution from the ent-kaurene–producing class I and class II diterpene synthases has led to roles for TPS-e/f and -c subfamily members in secondary metabolism as well. These results clarify TPS evolutionary history and provide context for the role of these genes in producing the vast diversity of terpenoid natural products observed today in various land plant 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".