To see or not to see: molecular evolution of the rhodopsin visual pigment in neotropical electric fishes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Functional variation in rhodopsin, the dim-light-specialized visual pigment, frequently occurs in species inhabiting light-limited environments. Variation in visual function can arise through two processes: relaxation of selection or adaptive evolution improving photon detection in a given environment. Here, we investigate the molecular evolution of rhodopsin in Gymnotiformes, an order of mostly nocturnal South American fishes that evolved sophisticated electrosensory capabilities. Our initial sequencing revealed a mutation associated with visual disease in humans. As these fishes are thought to have poor vision, this would be consistent with a possible sensory trade-off between the visual system and a novel electrosensory system. To investigate this, we surveyed rhodopsin from 147 gymnotiform species, spanning the order, and analysed patterns of molecular evolution. In contrast with our expectation, we detected strong selective constraint in gymnotiform rhodopsin, with rates of non-synonymous to synonymous substitutions lower in gymnotiforms than in other vertebrate lineages. In addition, we found evidence for positive selection on the branch leading to gymnotiforms and on a branch leading to a clade of deep-channel specialized gymnotiform species. We also found evidence that deleterious effects of a human disease-associated substitution are likely to be masked by epistatic substitutions at nearby sites. Our results suggest that rhodopsin remains an important component of the gymnotiform sensory system alongside electrolocation, and that photosensitivity of rhodopsin is well adapted for vision in dim-light environments.
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 | 0.001 | 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".