Comparative analysis of transposable elements dynamics in fish with different sex chromosome systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transposable elements (TEs) are widespread genomic components with substantial roles in genome evolution and sex chromosome differentiation. In this study, we compared the TE composition of three closely related fish with different sex chromosome systems: Megaleporinus elongatus (Z1Z1Z2Z2/Z1W1Z2W2), Megaleporinus macrocephalus (ZZ/ZW) (both with highly differentiated W sex chromosomes), and Leporinus friderici (without heteromorphic sex chromosomes). We created custom TE libraries for each species using clustering methods and manual annotation and prediction, and we predicted TE temporal dynamics through divergence-based analysis. The TE abundance ranged from 16% to 21% in the three mobilomes, with L. friderici having the lowest overall. Despite the recent amplification of TEs in all three species, we observed differing expansion activities, particularly between the two genera. Both Megaleporinus recently experienced high retrotransposon activity, with a reduction in DNA TEs, which could have implications in sex chromosome composition. In contrast, L. friderici showed the opposite pattern. Therefore, despite having similar TE compositions, Megaleporinus and Leporinus exhibit distinct TE histories that likely evolved after their separation, highlighting a rapid TE expansion over short evolutionary periods.
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) | 0.001 | 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".