Genetic and Behavioral Analysis of Natural Variation in<i>Drosophila melanogaster</i>Pupation Position
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drosophila melanogaster pupae are exposed to many biotic and abiotic dangers while immobilized during several days of metamorphosis. As a passive defense mechanism, appropriate pupation site selection represents an important mitigation of these threats. Pupation site selection is sensitive to genetic and environmental influences, but the specific mechanisms of the behavior are largely unknown. Using a set of 76 recombinant inbred strains we identify a single quantitative trait locus, at polytene position 56A01-C11, associated with pupation site variation. We furthermore present a detailed investigation into the wandering behaviors of two strains expressing different pupation position tendencies, and identify behavioral differences. Larvae from a strain that tends to pupate relatively far from the food also tend to travel significantly farther from the media during wandering. We did not observe consistent differences in either the number or duration of wandering forays made by near or far pupating strains. The ability of larvae to integrate several internal and external environmental cues while choosing a contextually appropriate pupation site, and specifically, the variation in this ability, presents a very interesting behavioral phenotype in this highly tractable genetic model organism.
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".