First insights into the satellitomes and new evidence for the absence of canonical insect telomere in the Neuroptera order
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Repetitive DNA is a major component of eukaryotic genomes, playing structural, and evolutionary roles. However, in Neuroptera, its characterization remains unexplored. To address this, we analyzed the satellitomes of two Chrysopini (Chrysopidae) species using cytogenomic tools, also investigating telomeric and ribosomal DNA (rDNA). The canonical insect telomeric motif was absent, and rDNA clusters showed variation compared to other neuropterans, despite karyotype stasis (2n = 12, XY). Satellite DNA (satDNA) abundance varied between Ceraeochrysa cincta and Chrysopa pallens, representing a minor fraction of their repetitive DNA content. Notably, no satDNA sequences were shared between species, suggesting a rapid turnover. Exceptionally, the second-most abundant satDNA in each species showed low sequence similarity and a putative common origin. A relationship between satDNAs and transposable elements was also observed. Chromosome mapping revealed that abundant satDNAs accumulated in euchromatin, providing insights into their genomic distribution. These findings enhance our understanding of satDNA organization in Neuroptera, offering a foundation for future genome assembly efforts and evolutionary studies in these insects.
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".