Sex-specific differences in the physiological basis of water conservation in the fruit fly<i>Drosophila hydei</i>from the western Himalayas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the cosmopolitan fruit fly Drosophila hydei Sturtevant, 1921 (Diptera: Drosophilidae), the relative abundance of males is significantly higher than females, but the physiological basis of such sex-specific differences are largely unknown. For wild populations of D. hydei, we found seasonal changes (summer versus autumn) in desiccation-related traits, but the desiccation tolerance of males was higher than that of females in all seasons. For desiccation-related traits, we tested whether thermal developmental acclimation at three temperatures (17, 21, and 28 °C) matched seasonal changes observed under wild conditions. Male flies showed significantly higher trait values for desiccation resistance, cuticular lipid mass, hemolymph content, carbohydrate content, and dehydration tolerance compared with females when reared at lower or higher temperatures despite the lack of significant sex-specific differences in the total body-water content of flies reared at a particular growth temperature. We observed plastic changes in the amount of cuticular lipids consistent with corresponding differences in the rate of water loss. Treatment of cuticular surface with organic solvent (hexane) supported the role of cuticular lipids in affecting transcuticular water loss. We found significant thermal plastic effects for desiccation-related traits of D. hydei, but the sexual dimorphism was in the opposite direction, i.e., males were more desiccation resistant than females in D. hydei, whereas the reverse is true for many other Drosophila species. Our results suggest that sex-specific differences in the level of desiccation resistance in D. hydei are good predictors of relative abundance levels of male and female flies under wild conditions.
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) | 0.000 | 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".