Transcriptomic Architecture of Reproductive Plasticity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Several species show diversity in reproductive patterns that result from phenotypic plasticity. This reproductive plasticity is found for example in mate choice, parental care, reproduction suppression, reproductive tactics, sex role, and sex reversal. Studying the genome-wide changes in transcription that are associated with these plastic phenotypes will help answer several questions, including those regarding which genes are expressed and where they are expressed when an individual is faced with a reproductive choice, as well as those regarding whether males and females have the same brain genomic signature when they express the same behaviors, or if they activate sex-specific molecular pathways to output similar behavioral responses. The comparative approach of studying transcription in a wide array of species allows us to uncover genes, pathways, and biological functions that are repeatedly co-opted (“genetic toolkit”) as well as those that are unique to a particular system (“genomic signature”). Additionally, by quantifying the transcriptome, a labile trait, using time series has the potential to uncover the causes and consequences of expressing one plastic phenotype or another. There are of course gaps in our knowledge of reproductive plasticity, but no shortage of possibilities for future directions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".