Thermoprotection of synaptic transmission in a<i>Drosophila</i>heat shock factor mutant is accompanied by increased expression of Hsp83 and DnaJ-1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Drosophila larvae, acquired synaptic thermotolerance after heat shock has previously been shown to correlate with the induction of heat shock proteins (Hsps) including HSP70. We tested the hypothesis that synaptic thermotolerance would be significantly diminished in a temperature-sensitive strain (Drosophila heat shock factor mutant hsf4), which has been reported not to be able to produce inducible Hsps in response to heat shock. Contrary to our hypothesis, considerable thermoprotection was still observed at hsf4 larval synapses after heat shock. To investigate the cause of this thermoprotection, we conducted DNA microarray experiments to identify heat-induced transcript changes in these organisms. Transcripts of the hsp83, dnaJ-1 (hsp40), and glutathione-S-transferase gstE1 genes were significantly upregulated in hsf4 larvae after heat shock. In addition, increases in the levels of Hsp83 and DnaJ-1 proteins but not in the inducible form of Hsp70 were detected by Western blot analysis. The mode of heat shock administration differentially affected the relative transcript and translational changes for these chaperones. These results indicate that the compensatory upregulation of constitutively expressed Hsps, in the absence of the synthesis of the major inducible Hsp, Hsp70, could still provide substantial thermoprotection to both synapses and the whole 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".