In defense of proteins: Chaperones respond to freezing, anoxia, or dehydration stress in tissues of freeze tolerant wood frogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wood frogs (Rana sylvatica LeConte) are the major model for studies of natural freeze tolerance by ectothermic vertebrates. Multiple biochemical adaptations support winter freezing survival but, to date, the protective role of chaperone proteins has received little attention. The present study analyzes responses to freezing, anoxia or dehydration exposures and recovery from these stresses by chaperone proteins in six wood frog organs: Five heat shock proteins (Hsc70, Hsp110, Hsp60, Hsp40, and Hsp10) and two glucose-regulated proteins (Grp78 and Grp94) were assessed. Hsc70 was upregulated in liver, muscle, heart and kidney (1.5-2.0 fold) during freezing and levels of its partner proteins also rose (Hsp110 in three tissues and Hsp40 in four tissues), these responses aligning most closely with comparable responses to anoxia rather than to dehydration. The resident chaperones of the endoplasmic reticulum (Grp78 and Grp94) also rose during freezing in liver and muscle (1.4-1.8 fold) but were suppressed in heart and skin, patterns that generally differed from responses to anoxia or dehydration. Elevated GRPs in liver may support the production and secretion of novel freeze responsive proteins. Increased levels of mitochondrial Hsp60 and Hsp10 (1.5-2.2 fold) occurred in most tissues during freezing and generally mimicked responses to anoxia. Overall, this study indicates that increased levels of chaperone proteins resident in multiple subcellular compartments contribute to stabilizing the cellular proteome during whole body freezing of wood frogs. These responses are probably derived from pre-existing amphibian defenses for stabilizing the proteome under environmental low oxygen or dehydration stresses.
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".