Do prostaglandins regulate external gill regression in anurans?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the endocrinological mechanism controlling regression of the internal, larval gills of anurans (frogs and toads) is well understood, the mechanism regulating loss of the external, embryonic gills is not known. Based on the homology of the mammalian ductus arteriosus with a portion of the amphibian branchial arches, and the regulation of blood flow in the mammalian ductus by prostaglandins of the E family (PGEs), we hypothesized that anuran external gill loss is also regulated by PGEs. To test this hypothesis, we topically applied both PGE2 and a synthetic analogue of PGE1, misoprostol, to embryos and young hatchlings of the red-eyed treefrog, Agalychnis callidryas. Both agents accelerated external gill regression. Furthermore, misoprostol overrode the inhibitory effect of hypoxia on gill regression in hatchlings and induced rapid loss of external gills in embryos, which normally maintain the gills until hatching. These observations support the hypothesis that PGEs regulate anuran external gill loss. The specific site of action for prostaglandins within the gills is not known; however, PGEs are secreted in the oral mucus of tadpoles, and this could be a natural topical source for these agents. PGEs offer a tool for manipulation of external gills and should facilitate tests of the physiological importance of these structures.
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".