Coral epigenetic responses to nutrient stress: Histone H2A.X phosphorylation dynamics and DNA methylation in the staghorn coral <i>Acropora cervicornis</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Nutrient pollution and thermal stress constitute two of the main drivers of global change in the coastal oceans. While different studies have addressed the physiological effects and ecological consequences of these stressors in corals, the role of acquired modifications in the coral epigenome during acclimatory and adaptive responses remains unknown. The present work aims to address that gap by monitoring two types of epigenetic mechanisms, namely histone modifications and DNA methylation, during a 7‐week‐long experiment in which staghorn coral fragments ( Acropora cervicornis) were exposed to nutrient stress (nitrogen, nitrogen + phosphorus) in the presence of thermal stress. The major conclusion of this experiment can be summarized by two main results: First, coral holobiont responses to the combined effects of nutrient enrichment and thermal stress involve the post‐translational phosphorylation of the histone variant H2A.X (involved in responses to DNA damage), as well as nonsignificant modifications in DNA methylation trends. Second, the reduction in H2A.X phosphorylation (and the subsequent potential impairment of DNA repair mechanisms) observed after prolonged coral exposure to nitrogen enrichment and thermal stress is consistent with the symbiont‐driven phosphorus limitation previously observed in corals subject to nitrogen enrichment. The alteration of this epigenetic mechanism could help to explain the synergistic effects of nutrient imbalance and thermal stress on coral fitness (i.e., increased bleaching and mortality) while supporting the positive effect of phosphorus addition to improving coral resilience to thermal stress. Overall, this work provides new insights into the role of epigenetic mechanisms during coral responses to global change, discussing future research directions and the potential benefits for improving restoration, management and conservation of coral reef ecosystems worldwide.
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".