Complete chloroplast genome sequence of Camellia sinensis: genome structure, adaptive evolution, and phylogenetic relationships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The chloroplast (cp) genome holds immense potential for a variety of applications including species identification, phylogenetic analysis, and evolutionary studies. In this study, we utilized Illumina NovaSeq 6000 to sequence the DNA of Camellia sinensis L. cultivar ‘Zhuyeqi’ , followed by the assembly of its chloroplast genome using SPAdes v3.10.1, with subsequent analysis of its features and phylogenetic placement. The results showed that the cp genome of Zhuyeqi was 157,072 bp, with a large single copy- region (LSC, 86,628 bp), a small single copy- region (SSC, 18,282 bp), and two inverted repeat regions (IR, 26,081 bp). The total AT and GC contents of the cp genome of Zhuyeqi were observed to be 62.21% and 37.29%, respectively. Thecp genome encoded 135 unique genes, including 90 protein-coding genes (CDS), 37 tRNA genes, and 8 rRNA genes. Moreover, 31 codons and 247 simple sequence repeats (SSRs) were identified. The cp genomes of Zhuyeqi was found to be relatively conserved, with particular conservation observed in the IR region, which showed no evidence of inversions or rearrangements.The five regions with the largest variations were identified, with four regions (rps12, rps19, rps16, and rpl33) located in the LSC region and one divergent region (trnI-GAU) in the IR region. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that Camellia sinensis(KJ996106.1) was closely related to Zhuyeqi, indicating a close phylogenetic relationship between these two species. These findings could provide important genetic information for further research into breeding of tea tree, phylogeny and evolution of Camellia sinensis.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
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".