Genomic evidence supports the genetic convergence of a supergene controlling the distylous floral syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heterostyly, a plant sexual polymorphism controlled by the S-locus supergene, has evolved numerous times among angiosperm lineages and represents a classic example of convergent evolution in form and function. Determining whether underlying molecular convergence occurs could provide insights on constraints to floral evolution. Here, we investigated S-locus genes in distylous Gelsemium (Gelsemiaceae) to determine whether there is evidence of molecular convergence with unrelated distylous species. We used several approaches, including anatomical measurements of sex-organ development and transcriptome and whole-genome sequencing, to identify components of the S-locus supergene. We also performed evolutionary analysis with candidate S-locus genes and compared them with those reported in Primula and Turnera. The candidate S-locus supergene of Gelsemium contained four genes, of which three appear to have originated from gene duplication events within Gelsemiaceae. The style-length genes GeCYP in Gelsemium and CYP734A50 in Primula likely arose from duplication of the same gene, CYP734A1. Three out of four S-locus genes in Gelsemium elegans were hemizygous, as previously reported in Primula and Turnera. We provide genomic evidence on the genetic convergence of the supergene underlying distyly among distantly related angiosperm lineages and help to illuminate the genetic architecture involved in the evolution of heterostyly.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".