Evidence for glutamate, GABA and NO in coordinating behaviour in the sponge, <i>Ephydatia muelleri</i> (Demospongiae, Spongillidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The view that sponges lack tissue level organisation, epithelia, sensory cells and coordinated behaviour is challenged by recent molecular studies showing the existence in Porifera of molecules and proteins that define cell signalling systems in higher order metazoans. Demonstration that freshwater sponges can contract their canals in an organised manner in response to both external and endogenous stimuli prompted us to examine the physiology of the contraction behaviour. Using a combination of digital time-lapse microscopy, high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS) analysis, immunocytochemistry and pharmacological manipulations, we tested the role of the diffusible amino acids glutamate and gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) and a short-lived diffusible gas, nitric oxide (NO), in triggering or modulating contractions in Ephydatia muelleri. We identified pools of glutamate, glutamine and GABA used to maintain a metabotropic glutamate and GABA receptor signalling system. Glutamate induced contractions and propagation of a stereotypical behaviour inflating and deflating the canal system, acting in a dose-dependent manner. Glutamate-triggered contractions were blocked by the metabatropic glutamate receptor inhibitor AP3 and by incubation of the sponge in an allosteric competitive inhibitor of glutamate, Kynurenic acid. Incubation in GABA inhibited glutamate-triggered contractions of the sponge. Nitric oxide synthase, involved in the formation of the diffusible gas NO, was localised using NADPH-diaphorase to mesenchyme cells in the osculum and pinacoderm. A cGMP assay showed the same cells were labelled suggesting that the NO system is functional. Our findings suggest sponges coordinate behaviour using chemical messenger systems common to other animals.
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".