Thermal sensitivity of mitochondrial metabolism in two distinct mitotypes of<i>Drosophila simulans</i>: evaluation of mitochondrial plasticity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The overall aim of this study was to (1) evaluate the adaptive value of mitochondrial DNA by comparing mitochondrial performance in populations possessing different haplotypes and distribution, and to (2) evaluate the sensitivity of different enzymes of the electron transport system (ETS) during temperature-induced changes. We measured the impact of temperature of mitochondrial respiration and several key enzymes of mitochondrial metabolism in two mitotypes (siII and siIII) of Drosophila simulans. The temperature dependencies of oxygen consumption for mitochondria isolated from flight muscle was assessed with complex I substrates (pyruvate + malate + proline) and with sn glycerol-3-phosphate (to reduce complex III via glycerophosphate dehydrogenase) in both coupled and uncoupled states. Activities of citrate synthase, cytochrome c oxidase (COX), catalase and aconitase, and the excess capacity of COX at high convergent pathway flux were also measured as a function of temperature. Overall, our results showed that functional differences between the two mitotypes are few. Results suggest that differences between the two mitotypes could hardly explain the temperature-specific differences measured in mitochondria performances. It suggests that some other factor(s) may be driving the maintenance of mitotypes. We also show that the different enzymes of the ETS have different thermal sensitivities. The catalytic capacities of these enzymes vary with temperature changes, and the corresponding involvement of the different steps on mitochondrial regulation probably varies with temperature. For example, the excess COX capacity is low, even non-existent, at high and intermediate temperatures (18 degrees C, 24 degrees C and 28 degrees C) whereas it is quite high at a lower temperature (12 degrees C), suggesting release of respiration control by COX at low temperature.
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) | 0.001 | 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".