Pronounced heritable variation and limited phenotypic plasticity in visual pigments and opsin expression of threespine stickleback photoreceptors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vertebrate colour vision is mediated by the differential expression of visual pigment proteins (opsins) in retinal cone photoreceptors. Many species alter opsin expression during life, either as part of development or as a result of changes in habitat. The latter, a result of phenotypic plasticity, appears common among fishes, but its cellular origin and ecological significance are unknown. Here, we used adult threespine stickleback fish from different photic regimes to investigate heritable variability and phenotypic plasticity in opsin expression. Fish from clear waters had double cones that expressed long (LWS) and middle (RH2) wavelength opsins, one per double cone member. In contrast, fish from red light-shifted lakes had double cones that were >95% LWS/LWS pairs. All fish had single cones that predominantly expressed a short wavelength (SWS2) opsin but ultraviolet cones, expressing a SWS1 opsin, were present throughout the retina. Fish from red light-shifted lakes, when transferred to clear waters, had a ∼2% increase in RH2/LWS double cones, though double cone density remained constant. Comparison of visual pigment absorbance and light transmission in the environment indicated that the opsin complements of double cones maximized sensitivity to the background light, whereas single cones had visual pigments that were spectrally offset from the dominant background wavelengths. Our results indicate that phenotypic plasticity in opsin expression is minor in sticklebacks and of questionable functional significance.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".