Genetic architecture of the <i>S</i> ‐locus supergene revealed in a tetraploid distylous species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Heterostyly is a polymorphic floral adaptation controlled by supergenes. The molecular basis of distyly has been investigated in diploid species from several unrelated families, but information is lacking for polyploid systems. Here, we address this knowledge gap in Schizomussaenda henryi , a tetraploid distylous species of Rubiaceae, the family with the greatest number of heterostylous species. Using chromosome‐level genome assemblies and transcriptome profiling, we characterized its tetraploid genome, identified the S ‐locus region, and performed evolutionary analysis. The S ‐locus contains four hemizygous genes in the S‐morph. SchzAUX22 emerged as a candidate gene potentially regulating both style length and filament growth via auxin signaling. Phylogenetic and k ‐mer‐based analysis suggested a hybrid allopolyploid origin for S. henryi , while no subgenome dominance was detected. Results from the comparison of K s values indicated that S ‐locus formation likely occurred through stepwise duplications. This study provides the first comprehensive genomic analysis of distyly in a polyploid species and demonstrates that the S ‐locus remains intact despite allopolyploidization resulting from hybridization. Our results indicated that polyploidization does not necessitate the breakdown of distyly, which occurs in several other heterostylous lineages.
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".