Autophagy‐related genes in rainbow trout <i>Oncorhynchus mykiss </i>(Walbaum) gill epithelial cells and their role in nutrient restriction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autophagy is primarily an adaptive response to provide nutrients and energy following exposure to stress and starvation but can also regulate muscle mass and impact infectious disease susceptibility. Expression of 10 autophagy-related (Atg) genes in rainbow trout was monitored throughout the autophagosome formation cycle. The Atg gene sequences of rainbow trout were compared to other species to identify highly conserved regions and to generate primers. Phylogeny trees created with rainbow trout and 14 other species demonstrate that rainbow trout Atg gene sequences have greatest similarity to Atlantic salmon and other fish species. RTgill-W1 cells were subjected to nutrient restriction and compared to cells in normal nutrient conditions using quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction to assess changes in Atg gene expression. Nutrient restriction had a direct impact on Atg gene expression, with atg4, atg9, atg12, lc3, gabarap and becn1 undergoing the greatest differential expression (p < 0.05), most dramatically on Day 3. This was corroborated by Western blot detection of LC3, which also showed a peak of autophagy activity at Day 3 post-nutrient restriction. Atg gene expression revealed autophagy flux in RTgill-W1, as well as, those genes that were most significantly altered by nutrient restriction.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".