Multiple specialised goose-type lysozymes potentially compensate for an exceptional lack of chicken-type lysozymes in Atlantic cod
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous analyses of the Atlantic cod genome showed unique combinations of lacking and expanded number of genes for the immune system. The present study examined lysozyme activity, lysozyme gene distribution and expression in cod. Enzymatic assays employing specific bacterial lysozyme inhibitors provided evidence for presence of g-type, but unexpectedly not for c-type lysozyme activity. Database homology searches failed to identify any c-type lysozyme gene in the cod genome or in expressed sequence tags from cod. In contrast, we identified four g-type lysozyme genes (LygF1a-d) constitutively expressed, although differentially, in all cod organs examined. The active site glutamate residue is replaced by alanine in LygF1a, thus making it enzymatic inactive, while LygF1d was found in two active site variants carrying alanine or glutamate, respectively. In vitro and in vivo infection by the intracellular bacterium Francisella noatunensis gave a significantly reduced LygF1a and b expression but increased expression of the LygF1c and d genes as did also the interferon gamma (IFNγ) cytokine. These results demonstrate a lack of c-type lysozyme that is unprecedented among vertebrates. Our results further indicate that serial gene duplications have produced multiple differentially regulated cod g-type lysozymes with specialised functions potentially compensating for the lack of c-type lysozymes.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".