Dogmas and controversies in the handling of nitrogenous wastes:Expression of arginase Type I and II genes in rainbow trout: influence of fasting on liver enzyme activity and mRNA levels in juveniles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through analysis of a cDNA library and third-party annotation of available database sequences, we characterized the full-length coding regions of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Type I, Onmy-ARG01, and Type II, Onmy-ARG02, arginase genes. Two partial related arginase sequences, Onmy-ARG01b and Onmy-ARG02b, and a full-length zebrafish arginase coding region (Danio rerio), Dare-ARG02, are also reported. Comparison of vertebrate arginase sequences shows that both Type I and Type II genes in bony fishes contain a mitochondrial targeting N-terminal domain. This suggests that the cytosolic Type I arginase found in ureotelic vertebrates arose in the common ancestor of amphibia and mammals. Onmy-ARG01 and Onmy-ARG02 mRNA was detected in liver, kidney, gill, intestine, red muscle and heart tissues. Onmy-ARG01 was expressed at a significantly higher level relative to Onmy-ARG02 in liver and red muscle tissue. To investigate whether there was differential regulation of Onmy-ARG01 and Onmy-ARG02, juvenile trout were fasted for 6 weeks and hepatic enzyme activities and mRNA levels were compared with those of fed control fish. There was a 3-fold increase in liver arginase activity and a 2-fold increase in Onmy-ARG02 mRNA levels but no change in Onmy-ARG01 mRNA levels in fasted fish relative to fed fish. These findings indicate that both types of arginase genes are present and expressed in rainbow trout and that the pattern of expression varies between tissues. The increase in liver arginase activity after a 6-week fast is due, in part, to an increase in the expression of Onmy-ARG02 mRNA levels.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".