Functional dissection and assembly of a small, newly evolved, W chromosome-specific genomic region of the African clawed frog Xenopus laevis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic triggers for sex determination are frequently co-inherited with other linked genes that may also influence one or more sex-specific phenotypes. To better understand how sex-limited regions evolve and function, we studied a small W chromosome-specific region of the frog Xenopus laevis that contains only three genes (dm-w, scan-w, ccdc69-w) and that drives female differentiation. Using gene editing, we found that the sex-determining function of this region requires dm-w but that scan-w and ccdc69-w are not essential for viability, female development, or fertility. Analysis of mesonephros+gonad transcriptomes during sexual differentiation illustrates masculinization of the dm-w knockout transcriptome, and identifies mostly non-overlapping sets of differentially expressed genes in separate knockout lines for each of these three W-specific gene compared to wildtype sisters. Capture sequencing of almost all Xenopus species and PCR surveys indicate that the female-determining function of dm-w is present in only a subset of species that carry this gene. These findings map out a dynamic evolutionary history of a newly evolved W chromosome-specific genomic region, whose components have distinctive functions that frequently degraded during Xenopus diversification, and evidence the evolutionary consequences of recombination suppression.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".