Tranosema rostrale ichnovirus repeat element genes display distinct transcriptional patterns in caterpillar and wasp hosts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The endoparasitic wasp Tranosema rostrale transmits an ichnovirus to its lepidopteran host, Choristoneura fumiferana, during parasitization. As shown for other ichnoviruses, the segmented dsDNA genome of the T. rostrale ichnovirus (TrIV) features several multi-gene families, including the repeat element (rep) family, whose products display no known similarity to non-ichnovirus proteins, except for a homologue encoded by the genome of the Helicoverpa armigera granulovirus; their functions remain unknown. This study applied linear regression of efficiency analysis to real-time PCR quantification of transcript abundance for all 17 TrIV rep open reading frames (ORFs) in parasitized and virus-injected C. fumiferana larvae, as well as in T. rostrale ovaries and head-thorax complexes. Although transcripts were detected for most rep ORFs in infected caterpillars, two of them clearly outnumbered the others in whole larvae, with a tendency for levels to drop over time after infection. The genome segments bearing the three most highly expressed rep genes in parasitized caterpillars were present in higher proportions than other rep-bearing genome segments in TrIV DNA, suggesting a possible role for gene dosage in the regulation of transcription level. TrIV rep genes also showed important differences in the relative abundance of their transcripts in specific tissues (cuticular epithelium, the fat body, haemocytes and the midgut), implying tissue-specific roles for individual members of this gene family. Significantly, no rep transcripts were detected in T. rostrale head-thorax complexes, whereas some were abundant in ovaries. There, the transcription pattern was completely different from that observed in infected caterpillars, suggesting that some rep genes have wasp-specific functions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".