Genome-wide comparisons reveal broad variations in intraspecific SNP frequencies among species in Agaricomycetes, Basidiomycota
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Genome sequence analyses can provide crucial information for understanding population history, speciation, and taxonomy. In Class Agaricomycetes where most mushroom-forming fungi belong, most species so far have been defined based on morphological, ecological, and/or molecular features. At present, there is little information on how species defined based on such features reflect their genome sequence diversity. In this study, we investigated genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) frequencies between strains within species to understand the patterns of variation. Methods: A total of 112 species in 72 genera of Agaricomycetes contained the nuclear and/or mitochondrial genome sequences from at least two strains each in public databases. Together, we obtained 398 and 106 available nuclear and mitochondrial genomes respectively from these taxa. Pairwise strain comparisons of the nuclear and mitochondrial genomes within individual species were conducted to obtain their SNP frequencies. Results: The SNP frequencies between nuclear genomes within individual species ranged 0–7.69% while for the mitochondrial genome, the pairwise strain SNP frequencies ranged 0–4.41%. The Spearman’s non-parametric rank correlation test showed a weak but statistically significant positive correlation between the paired nuclear and mitochondrial genome SNP frequencies. Overall, we observed a significantly higher SNP frequency in the nuclear genome than in the mitochondrial genomes between strains within most species. Interestingly, across the broad Basidiomycetes, the ratios of mitochondrial genome SNPs and nuclear genome SNPs between pairs of strains within each species were almost all lower than 1, with a mean of 0.24. Conclusions: Our analyses revealed broad variations among species in their intraspecific SNP frequencies in both the nuclear and mitochondrial genomes. However, there was broad consensus among the examined species in their mitochondrial to nuclear genome SNP ratios, suggesting that such a ratio could potentially serve as an indicator for genome sequence-based species identification.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".