Phenotypic plasticity in <i>Periplaneta americana</i> photoreceptors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plasticity is a crucial aspect of neuronal physiology essential for proper development and continuous functional optimization of neurons and neural circuits. Despite extensive studies of different visual systems, little is known about plasticity in mature microvillar photoreceptors. Here we investigate changes in electrophysiological properties and gene expression in photoreceptors of the adult cockroach, Periplaneta americana, after exposure to constant light (CL) or constant dark (CD) for several months. After CL, we observed a decrease in mean whole-cell capacitance, a proxy for cell membrane area, from 362 ± 160 to 157 ± 58 pF, and a decrease in absolute sensitivity. However, after CD, we observed an increase in capacitance to 561 ± 155 pF and an increase in absolute sensitivity. Small changes in the expression of light-sensitive channels and signaling molecules were detected in CD retinas, together with a substantial increase in the expression of the primary green-sensitive opsin (GO1). Accordingly, light-induced currents became larger in CD photoreceptors. Even though normal levels of GO1 expression were retained in CL photoreceptors, light-induced currents became much smaller, suggesting that factors other than opsin are involved. Latency of phototransduction also decreased significantly in CL photoreceptors. Sustained voltage-activated K+ conductance was not significantly different between the experimental groups. The reduced capacitance of CL photoreceptors expanded their bandwidth, increasing the light-driven voltage signal at high frequencies. However, voltage noise was also amplified, probably because of unaltered expression of TRPL channels. Consequently, information transfer rates were lower in CL than in control or CD photoreceptors. These changes in whole-cell capacitance and electrophysiological parameters suggest that structural modifications can occur in the photoreceptors to adapt their function to altered environmental conditions. The opposing patterns of modifications in CL and CD photoreceptors differ profoundly from previous findings in Drosophila melanogaster photoreceptors.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".