Nucleobase-containing compounds evoke behavioural, olfactory, and transcriptional responses in model fishes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sensory system of animals detects a massive and unknown array of chemical cues that evoke a diversity of physiological and behavioural responses. One group of nitrogen-containing carbon ring chemicals—nucleobases—are thought to be involved in numerous behaviours yet have received little attention. We took a top-down approach to examine responses evoked by nucleobases at behavioural, tissue, and gene expression levels. Fish generally avoided nucleobases, and this behaviour, when observed, was driven by purines but not pyrimidines. At the tissue level, olfactory neuron generator potential responses tended to be concentration specific and robust at concentrations lower than amino acid detection ranges. In terms of gene expression, more than 2000 genes were significantly upregulated following nucleobase exposure, some of which were expected (e.g., genes involved in purine binding) and some of which were not (e.g., tubulin-related genes). Humanized RNA pathway analysis showed that we had exposed the animal to a nucleobase. Our data indicate that responses to nucleobase-containing compounds may be highly structure based and are evident from changes in behaviour to mRNA expression. Many of these responses were surprising, and all provide numerous routes for further research endeavour.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".