MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910862503 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1818283116

Gypsy moth genome provides insights into flight capability and virus–host interactions

2019· article· en· W2910862503 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jing Zhang, Qian Cong, Emily A. Rex, Winnie Hallwachs, Daniel H. Janzen, Nick V. Grishin, Don B. Gammon

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesWelch Foundation
KeywordsLymantria disparGypsy mothBiologyDisparGenomeEvolutionary biologyGeneZoologyGeneticsLepidoptera genitaliaEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since its accidental introduction to Massachusetts in the late 1800s, the European gypsy moth (EGM; Lymantria dispar dispar ) has become a major defoliator in North American forests. However, in part because females are flightless, the spread of the EGM across the United States and Canada has been relatively slow over the past 150 years. In contrast, females of the Asian gypsy moth (AGM; Lymantria dispar asiatica ) subspecies have fully developed wings and can fly, thereby posing a serious economic threat if populations are established in North America. To explore the genetic determinants of these phenotypic differences, we sequenced and annotated a draft genome of L. dispar and used it to identify genetic variation between EGM and AGM populations. The 865-Mb gypsy moth genome is the largest Lepidoptera genome sequenced to date and encodes ∼13,300 proteins. Gene ontology analyses of EGM and AGM samples revealed divergence between these populations in genes enriched for several gene ontology categories related to muscle adaptation, chemosensory communication, detoxification of food plant foliage, and immunity. These genetic differences likely contribute to variations in flight ability, chemical sensing, and pathogen interactions among EGM and AGM populations. Finally, we use our new genomic and transcriptomic tools to provide insights into genome-wide gene-expression changes of the gypsy moth after viral infection. Characterizing the immunological response of gypsy moths to virus infection may aid in the improvement of virus-based bioinsecticides currently used to control larval populations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.254 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations45
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicLepidoptera: Biology and TaxonomyFrench-language works237,207