MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562929168 · doi:10.1534/genetics.116.197939

Feeding-Related Traits Are Affected by Dosage of the<i>foraging</i>Gene in<i>Drosophila melanogaster</i>

2016· article· en· W2562929168 on OpenAlexafffund
Aaron M. Allen, Ina Anreiter, Megan C. Neville, Marla B. Sokolowski

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologyForagingDrosophila melanogasterGeneticsGeneLocus (genetics)AlleleAlternative splicingExonEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nutrient acquisition and energy storage are critical parts of achieving metabolic homeostasis. The foraging gene in Drosophila melanogaster has previously been implicated in multiple feeding-related and metabolic traits. Before foraging’s functions can be further dissected, we need a precise genetic null mutant to definitively map its amorphic phenotypes. We used homologous recombination to precisely delete foraging, generating the for0 null allele, and used recombineering to reintegrate a full copy of the gene, generating the {forBAC} rescue allele. We show that a total loss of foraging expression in larvae results in reduced larval path length and food intake behavior, while conversely showing an increase in triglyceride levels. Furthermore, varying foraging gene dosage demonstrates a linear dose-response on these phenotypes in relation to foraging gene expression levels. These experiments have unequivocally proven a causal, dose-dependent relationship between the foraging gene and its pleiotropic influence on these feeding-related traits. Our analysis of foraging’s transcription start sites, termination sites, and splicing patterns using rapid amplification of cDNA ends (RACE) and full-length cDNA sequencing, revealed four independent promoters, pr1–4, that produce 21 transcripts with nine distinct open reading frames (ORFs). The use of alternative promoters and alternative splicing at the foraging locus creates diversity and flexibility in the regulation of gene expression, and ultimately function. Future studies will exploit these genetic tools to precisely dissect the isoform- and tissue-specific requirements of foraging’s functions and shed light on the genetic control of feeding-related traits involved in energy homeostasis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations61
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneticsSame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207