MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2498398202 · doi:10.7717/peerj.3284

Seasonal shifts in accumulation of glycerol biosynthetic gene transcripts in mountain pine beetle, <i>Dendroctonus ponderosae</i> Hopkins (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), larvae

2017· article· en· W2498398202 on OpenAlexafffund
Jordie D. Fraser, Tiffany R. Bonnett, Christopher I. Keeling, Dezene P.W. Huber

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant biochemistry and biosynthesis
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundGenome AlbertaGenome British ColumbiaGenome Canada
KeywordsMountain pine beetleDendroctonusBiologyOverwinteringCurculionidaePopulationCurculioPhosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinaseBotanyBark beetleGluconeogenesisEcologyGeneMetabolismBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hopkins (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Glycerol is the major cryoprotectant in this freeze intolerant insect. We report findings from a gene expression study on an overwintering mountain pine beetle population over the course of 35 weeks. mRNA transcript levels suggest glycerol production in the mountain pine beetle occurs through glycogenolytic, gluconeogenic and potentially glyceroneogenic pathways, but not from metabolism of lipids. A two-week lag period between fall glycogen phosphorylase transcript and phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase transcript up-regulation suggests that gluconeogenesis serves as a secondary glycerol-production process, subsequent to exhaustion of the primary glycogenolytic source. These results provide a first look at the details of seasonal gene expression related to the production of glycerol in the mountain pine beetle.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.255 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations41
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicPlant biochemistry and biosynthesisFrench-language works237,207