The implications for aquaculture practice of epigenomic programming of components of the endocrine system of teleostean embryos: lessons learned from mammalian studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Epigenetics is the study of changes in gene expression patterns that occur without any modification of the underlying nucleotide sequence of the DNA. Modifications of the so‐called epigenome include complex transient or permanent chemical changes of the DNA or histone proteins resulting in the suppression or enhancement of gene expression, together with an array of post‐translational events that modify the translational products. Epigenomic programming (EP) of the genome is an essential component of embryonic development in animals from the totipotent fertilized egg to the pluripotent stem cells, stem cell differentiation and final tissue and organ formation. Many of these EP processes are influenced transiently and some permanently by environmental influences. In eutherian mammals, environmentally related EP of embryos is linked to permanent changes in the phenotype of the progeny, some of which have been associated with adult onset metabolic disorders. Moreover, because some of the epigenetic remodelling occurs in both the soma and germ line, the resultant phenotypic characteristics (some of which are linked to disease states) may be heritable. Although far less is known about the effects of environmentally linked EP on the ontogeny of fishes, the available information suggests that the EP processes are similar amongst all vertebrates, and there are clear parallels between fish and mammals that are discussed in this paper. Our perspective takes the well‐established findings in mammals and uses them to proactively extrapolate to the as yet under‐recognized implications of EP for fish biology and for fish production in intensive aquaculture.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".