Genome-Wide Scan for Bats and Dolphin to Detect Their Genetic Basis for New Locomotive Styles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For most mammals, running is their major locomotive style, however, cetaceans and bats are two mammalian groups that have independently developed new locomotive styles (swimming and flying) from their terrestrial ancestors. In this study, we used a genome-wide comparative analysis in an attempt to identify the selective imprint of the development of new locomotive styles by cetaceans and bats to adapt to their new ecological niches. We found that an elevated proportion of mitochondrion-associated genes show evidence of adaptive evolution in cetaceans and on the common ancestral lineage leading to bats, compared to other terrestrial mammals. This result is consistent with the fact that during the independent developments of swimming and flying in these two groups, the changes of energy metabolism ratios would be among the most important factors to overcome elevated energy demands. Furthermore, genes that show evidence of sequence convergence or parallel evolution in these two lineages were overrepresented in the categories of energy metabolism, muscle contraction, heart, and glucose metabolism, genes that perform functions which are essential for locomotion. In conclusion, our analyses showed that on the dolphin and bat lineages, genes associated with locomotion not only both show a greater propensity to adaptively evolve, but also show evidence of sequence convergence, which likely reflects a response to a common requirement during their development of these two drastic locomotive styles.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".