MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Antifreeze protein gene amplification facilitated niche exploitation and speciation in wolffish

2012· article· en· W1558582679 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mariève Desjardins, Laurie A. Graham, Peter L. Davies, Garth L. Fletcher

Bibliographic record

VenueFEBS Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologyAntifreeze proteinInterspecific competitionGene flowHabitatEcologyZoologyGenetic algorithmGeneGeneticsGenetic variation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During winter, the coastal waters of Newfoundland can be considered a 'freeze risk ecozone' for teleost fishes, where the shallower habitats pose a high (and the deeper habitats a low) risk of freezing. Atlantic (Anarhichas lupus) and spotted (Anarhichas minor) wolffish, which inhabit these waters, reside at opposite ends of this ecozone, with the Atlantic wolffish being the species facing the greatest risk, because of its shallower niche. In order to resist freezing, this species secretes five times the level of antifreeze protein (AFP) activity into the plasma than does the spotted wolffish. The main basis for this interspecific difference in AFP levels is gene dosage, as the Atlantic wolffish has approximately three times as many AFP gene copies as the spotted wolffish. In addition, AFP transcript levels in liver (the primary source of circulating AFPs) are several times higher in the Atlantic wolffish. One explanation for the difference in gene dosage and transcript levels is the presence of tandemly arrayed repeats in the latter, which make up two-thirds of its AFP gene pool. Such repeats are not present in the spotted wolffish. The available evidence indicates that the two species diverged from a common ancestor at a time when the ebb and flow of northern glaciations would have resulted in the emergence of shallow water 'freeze risk ecozones'. The results of this study suggest that the duplication/amplification of AFP genes in a subpopulation of ancestral wolffish would have facilitated the exploitation of this high-risk habitat, resulting in the divergence and evolution of modern-day Atlantic and spotted wolffish species.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEBS JournalSame topicPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsFrench-language works237,207