MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2717391903 · doi:10.1098/rsos.170446

Host association and selection on salivary protein genes in bed bugs and related blood-feeding ectoparasites

2017· article· en· W2717391903 on OpenAlexafffund
Benoit Talbot, Ondřej Balvín, Maarten J. Vonhof, Hugh G. Broders, M. Brock Fenton, Nusha Keyghobadi

Bibliographic record

VenueRoyal Society Open Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicVector-borne infectious diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooWestern University
FundersWestern UniversityUniverzita Karlova v PrazeNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWestern Michigan University
KeywordsBiologyHost (biology)Cimex lectulariusGeneHost adaptationSalivaAdaptation (eye)ZoologySalivary glandGeneticsGenomeHemiptera

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reciprocal selective pressures can drive coevolutionary changes in parasites and hosts, and result in parasites that are highly specialized to their hosts. Selection and host co-adaptation are better understood in endoparasites than in ectoparasites, whose life cycles may be more loosely linked to that of their hosts. Blood-feeding ectoparasites use salivary proteins to prevent haemostasis in the host, and maximize energy intake. Here we looked for signals of selection in salivary protein genes of ectoparasite species from a single genus ( Cimex ) that associate with a range of hosts including mammals (bats and humans) and birds (swallows). We analysed two genes that code for salivary proteins that inhibit platelet aggregation and vasoconstriction and may directly affect the efficiency of blood feeding in these species. Significant positive selection was detected at five codons in one gene in all bat-associated species groups. Our results suggest association with bats, versus humans or swallows, has posed a selective pressure on the salivary apyrase gene in species of Cimex .

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRoyal Society Open ScienceSame topicVector-borne infectious diseasesFrench-language works237,207