Facing environmental predictability with different sources of epigenetic variation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Different sources of epigenetic changes can increase the range of phenotypic options. Environmentally induced epigenetic changes and stochastic epimutations are, respectively, associated with phenotypic plasticity and diversifying bet-hedging. Their relative contribution is thus expected to reflect the capacity of a genotype to face distinct changes since these strategies are differentially selected according to environmental uncertainty. To test this hypothesis, we assessed the sources of epigenetic changes on clonal fish from predictable (lakes) or unpredictable (intermittent streams) environments. DNA methylation of clones from natural conditions revealed contrasting contribution of environmentally induced versus stochastic changes according to their origins. These differences were validated in common garden experiments. Consistent with theoretical models, distinct sources of epigenetic variation prevail according to the environmental uncertainty. However, both sources act conjointly, suggesting that plasticity and random processes are complementary strategies. This represents a rigorous approach for further exploring the capacity of organisms to respond to environmental conditions.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".