The effect of selection for desiccation resistance on cold tolerance of <i>Drosophila melanogaster</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Low temperature and desiccation stress are thought to be mechanistically similar in insects, and several studies indicate that there is a degree of cross‐tolerance between them, such that increased cold tolerance results in greater desiccation tolerance and vice versa . This assertion is tested at an evolutionary scale by examining basal cold tolerance, rapid cold‐hardening (RCH) and chill coma recovery in replicate populations of Drosophila melanogaster selected for desiccation resistance (with controls for both selection and concomitant starvation) for over 50 generations. All of the populations display a RCH response, and there is no effect of selection regime on RCH or basal cold tolerance, although there are differences in basal cold tolerance between sampling dates, apparently related to inter‐individual variation in development time. Flies selected for desiccation tolerance recover from chill coma slightly, but significantly, faster than control and starvation‐control flies. These findings provide little support for cross‐tolerance between survival of near‐lethal cold and desiccation stress in D. melanogaster .
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".