MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312408006 · doi:10.5376/mpb.2022.13.0028

Analyses of Codon Usage Patterns and Codon Usage Bias in Peach (<i>Prunus persica</i>)

2022· article· en· W4312408006 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ruoyu Li, Xiaodan Zhang, Xinyi Ma, Rui Guo, Shaobin Yan, Guang Jin, Ping Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Plant Breeding · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFujian Academy of Agricultural SciencesModern Agricultural Technology Industry System of Shandong province
KeywordsCodon usage biasBiologyGeneticsGenomeGC-contentTransfer RNAGeneStart codonOpen reading frameStop codonRNAMessenger RNAPeptide sequence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To further study the characteristics of peach codon usage, this study analyzed codon usage biases and codon usage patterns of peach genome, based on the statistical calculations of related GC content, effective number of codons (ENC) and relative synonymous codons (RSCU) from 26 873 coding sequences. The results showed that there were obvious biases in codon usage of peach, and 4 out of 61 codons (UCA, ACA, GCA and GAA) were defined as the optimal codons, all of which end with Adenine at the third codon position. Further analyses of codon usage frequency among peach and other 9 relative species in Rosaceae found that the codon usage patterns in the relative genus were similar. These results also suggested that there was a positive correlation between the copy number of tRNA genes and the occurrence frequency of corresponding amino acids (and specific codons) in the peach genome. These results revealed codon usage patterns in Peach and provide an important reference for the relevant studies on codon usage mechanism and the genetic engineering.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Plant BreedingSame topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsFrench-language works237,207