Energy metabolism in orchid bee flight muscles: carbohydrate fuels all
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The widely accepted idea that bees fuel flight through the oxidation of carbohydrate is based on studies of only a few species. We tested this hypothesis as part of our research program to investigate the size-dependence of flight energetics in Panamanian orchid bees. We succeeded in measuring rates of O(2) consumption and CO(2) production in vivo during hovering flight, as well as maximal activities (V(max) values) in vitro of key enzymes in flight muscle energy metabolism in nine species belonging to four genera. Respiratory quotients (ratios of rates of CO(2) production to O(2) consumption) in all nine species are close to 1.0. This indicates that carbohydrate is the main fuel used for flight. Trehalase, glycogen phosphorylase and hexokinase activities are sufficient to account for the glycolytic flux rates estimated from rates of CO(2) production. High activities of other glycolytic enzymes, as well as high activities of mitochondrial oxidative enzymes, are consistent with the estimated rates of carbohydrate-fueled oxidative metabolism. In contrast, hydroxyacylCoA dehydrogenase, an enzyme involved in fatty acid oxidation, was not detectable in any species. Thoracic homogenates displayed ADP-stimulated oxidition of pyruvate + proline, but did not oxidize palmitoyl l-carnitine + proline as substrates. A metabolic map, based on data reported herein and information from the literature, is presented. The evidence available supports the hypothesis that carbohydrate serves as the main fuel for flight in bees.
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 | 0.001 | 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".