MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2887358995 · doi:10.1242/jeb.187120

Repeated freezing costs flies offspring

2018· article· en· W2887358995 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathryn Knight

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverwinteringHorticultureBiologyEcologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the search for inhabitable planets beyond our solar system, water is top of the list of requirements for life. However, when temperatures fall below 0°C, water becomes our enemy, shattering delicate cell structures and destroying life. Brent Sinclair, from the University of Western Ontario, Canada, explains that overwintering insects in Canada frequently experience temperatures well below −40°C as maggots, yet emerge unscathed as adults in spring; and the survivors have usually endured multiple icy encounters. He suspects that goldenrod gall flies (Eurosta solidaginis) – which spend the winter entombed in a dead plant gall – can freeze as many as 20 times before spring. ‘But most of the experiments have been done by simply exposing animals to one cycle of cold’, says Sinclair. Wondering how the robust maggots respond as the mercury repeatedly plunges below zero, Sinclair and Katie Marshall designed an extensive series of simulated winters to test the insects’ survival strategies.Fortunately, 2009 was a bumper year for the flies, with more than half of the 5000 goldenrod galls harvested by Marshall and an army of undergraduates yielding juicy fat maggots. Marshall then repeatedly froze the undeveloped insects to temperatures of −10, −15 or −20°C for 12 h intervals, interspersed with recovery periods at 0.2°C of 1, 5 and 10 days, before repeating the chilly experience 2, 5 or 9 more times. However, 3 days in, disaster stuck. Marshall seriously fractured her leg slipping on ice. Fortunately, the lab rallied round. ‘Katie knew this was going to be an epic experiment, so had made a detailed protocol for what treatments needed to happen and when’, recalls Sinclair, adding, ‘Even so, Katie did a lot of this from a wheelchair’.Eventually, after months of patiently collecting maggots at the end of their personal chilling protocols, Marshall meticulously measured the amount of antifreeze in their bodies – including sweet-tasting sorbitol – in addition to how the types of lipids varied and recording how many maggots survived, going on to develop into adults.Impressively, the maggots survived repeated freezing remarkably well, with the insects that had the longest recovery period (10 days) recording a survival rate of 80% at the lowest temperature (−20°C). Also, the maggots that had experienced ten 12 h long freezing sessions contained ∼50% more sorbitol than the maggots that had been frozen for a single 120 h period. In addition, Marshall discovered that the repeatedly frozen insects had converted more of their high-energy lipids into acetylated triacylglycerols, which are less energy rich but remain fluid at low temperatures.Most intriguing was the effect that repeated freezing had on the amount of energy that each female could invest in her own reproduction. Knowing that the adult female flies emerge complete with a lifetime's supply of eggs ready for their brief existence, Marshall wondered how repeated freezing might impact the number of eggs carried by the new adults. After allowing some of the maggots to develop, she counted the eggs carried by the female adults; the winter experience had taken a toll, reducing egg production by almost 10%.‘Repeated freezing matters’, says Sinclair, adding that extrapolations based on single freezing events could significantly underestimate what happens in the real world. He also hopes to continue his long-term field study of overwintering maggots in order to identify factors that will allow him to predict how well insects will tolerate future winters. ‘We've been going for a decade … maybe another 15 years or so will do the trick’, he smiles.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.006

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental Biology→Same topicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations→French-language works237,207→