MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167578242 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2009.1807

Repeated stress exposure results in a survival–reproduction trade-off in<i>Drosophila melanogaster</i>

2009· article· en· W2167578242 on OpenAlexaff
Katie E. Marshall, Brent J. Sinclair

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFecundityDrosophila melanogasterBiologyGlycogenReproductionAbiotic componentOrganismFertilityDrosophila (subgenus)Animal scienceToxicologyZoologyEcologyGeneticsDemographyPopulationEndocrinologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While insect cold tolerance has been well studied, the vast majority of work has focused on the effects of a single cold exposure. However, many abiotic environmental stresses, including temperature, fluctuate within an organism's lifespan. Given that organisms may trade-off survival at the cost of future reproduction, we investigated the effects of multiple cold exposures on survival and fertility in the model organism Drosophila melanogaster. We found that multiple cold exposures significantly decreased mortality compared with the same length of exposure in a single sustained bout, but significantly decreased fecundity (as measured by r, the intrinsic rate of increase) as well, owing to a shift in sex ratio. This change was reflected in a long-term decrease in glycogen stores in multiply exposed flies, while a brief effect on triglyceride stores was observed, suggesting flies are reallocating energy stores. Given that many environments are not static, this trade-off indicates that investigating the effects of repeated stress exposure is important for understanding and predicting physiological responses in the wild.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations255
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsFrench-language works237,207