Coordination of Chemical (Trimethylamine Oxide) and Molecular (Heat Shock Protein 70) Chaperone Responses to Heat Stress in Elasmobranch Red Blood Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chemical and molecular chaperones are organic compounds that protect and stabilize proteins from damage and aggregation as a result of cellular stress. Using the dogfish (Squalus acanthias) red blood cell (RBC) as a model, we examined whether elasmobranch cells with naturally high concentrations of the chemical chaperone trimethylamine oxide (TMAO) would induce the molecular chaperone heat shock protein 70 (HSP70) when exposed to an acute thermal stress. Our hypothesis was that TMAO is itself capable of preventing damage and preserving cellular function during thermal stress and thus that the heat shock response would be inhibited/diminished. We incubated RBCs in vitro with and without physiologically relevant concentrations of TMAO at 13°C and then exposed cells to a 1-h acute heat shock at 24°C. HSP70 protein expression was elevated in dogfish RBCs after the acute heat stress, but this induction was inhibited by extracellular TMAO. Regardless of the presence of TMAO and/or HSP70, we did not observe any cell damage, as indicated by changes in caspase 3/7 activity, protein carbonyls, membrane viability, or levels of ubiquitin. We also saw no change in RBC cell function, as determined by hemoglobin oxygen affinity or carrying capacity, in cells lacking the heat shock response but protected by TMAO. This study demonstrates that there is cellular coordination between chemical and molecular chaperones in response to an acute thermal stress in dogfish RBCs and suggests that TMAO has a thermoprotective role in these cells, thus eliminating the need for a heat shock response.
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) | 0.000 | 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".