Evolution of Cytochrome c Oxidase in Hypoxia Tolerant Sculpins (Cottidae, Actinopterygii)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vertebrate hypoxia tolerance can emerge from modifications to the oxygen (O2) transport cascade, but whether there is adaptive variation to O2 binding at the terminus of this cascade, mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase (COX), is not known. In order to address the hypothesis that hypoxia tolerance is associated with enhanced O2 binding by mitochondria we undertook a comparative analysis of COX O2 kinetics across species of intertidal sculpins (Cottidae, Actinopterygii) that vary in hypoxia tolerance. Our analysis revealed a significant relationship between hypoxia tolerance (critical O2 tension of O2 consumption rate; Pcrit), mitochondrial O2 binding affinity (O2 tension at which mitochondrial respiration was half maximal; P50), and COX O2-binding affinity (apparent Michaelis-Menten constant for O2 binding to COX; Km,app O2). The more hypoxia tolerant species had both a lower mitochondrial P50 and lower COX Km,app O2, facilitating the maintenance of mitochondrial function to a lower O2 tension than in hypoxia intolerant species. Additionally, hypoxia tolerant species had a lower overall COX Vmax but higher mitochondrial COX respiration rate when expressed relative to maximal electron transport system respiration rate. In silico analyses of the COX3 subunit postulated as the entry point for O2 into the COX protein catalytic core, points to variation in COX3 protein stability (estimated as free energy of unfolding) contributing to the variation in COX Km,app O2. We propose that interactions between COX3 and cardiolipin at four amino acid positions along the same alpha-helix forming the COX3 v-cleft represent likely determinants of interspecific differences in COX Km,app O2.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".