Different Endosymbiotic Interactions in Two Hydra Species Reflect the Evolutionary History of Endosymbiosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Endosymbiosis is an important evolutionary event for organisms, and there is widespread interest in understanding the evolution of endosymbiosis establishment. Hydra is one of the most suitable organisms for studying the evolution of endosymbiosis. Within the genus Hydra, H. viridissima and H. vulgaris show endosymbiosis with green algae. Previous studies suggested that the endosymbiosis in H. vulgaris took place much more recently than that in H. viridissima, noting that the establishment of the interaction between H. vulgaris and its algae is not as stable as in H. viridissima. To investigate the on-going process of endosymbiosis, we first compared growth and tolerance to starvation in symbiotic and aposymbiotic polyps of both species. The results revealed that symbiotic H. viridissima had a higher growth rate and greater tolerance to starvation than aposymbiotic polyps. By contrast, growth of symbiotic H. vulgaris was identical to that of aposymbiotic polyps, and symbiotic H. vulgaris was less tolerant to starvation. Moreover, our gene expression analysis showed a pattern of differential gene expression in H. viridissima similar to that in other endosymbiotically established organisms, and contrary to that observed in H. vulgaris We also showed that H. viridissima could cope with oxidative stress that caused damage, such as cell death, in H. vulgaris These observations support the idea that oxidative stress related genes play an important role in the on-going process of endosymbiosis evolution. The different evolutionary stages of endosymbiosis studied here provide a deeper insight into the evolutionary processes occurring toward a stable endosymbiosis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".