Setting the pace of life: membrane composition of flight muscle varies with metabolic rate of hovering orchid bees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patterns of metabolic rate variation have been documented extensively in animals, but their functional basis remains elusive. The membrane pacemaker hypothesis proposes that the relative abundance of polyunsaturated fatty acids in membrane phospholipids sets the metabolic rate of organisms. Using species of tropical orchid bees spanning a 16-fold range in body size, we show that the flight muscles of smaller bees have more linoleate (%18 : 3) and stearate (%18 : 0), but less oleate (%18 : 1). More importantly, flight metabolic rate (FlightMR) varies with the relative abundance of 18 : 3 according to the predictions of the membrane pacemaker hypothesis. Although this relationship was found across large differences in metabolic rate, a direct association could not be detected when taking phylogeny and body mass into account. Higher FlightMR, however, was related to lower %16 : 0, independent of phylogeny and body mass. Therefore, this study shows that flight muscle membrane composition plays a significant role in explaining diversity in FlightMR, but that body mass and phylogeny are other factors contributing to their variation. Multiple factors are at play to modulate metabolic capacity, and changing membrane composition can have gradual and stepwise effects to achieve a new range of metabolic rates. Orchid bees illustrate the correlated evolution between membrane composition and metabolic rate, supporting the functional link proposed in the membrane pacemaker hypothesis.
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".