Alternative splicing is highly variable among Daphnia pulex lineages in response to acute copper exposure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite being one of the primary mechanisms of gene expression regulation in eukaryotes, alternative splicing is often overlooked in ecotoxicogenomic studies. The process of alternative splicing facilitates the production of multiple mRNA isoforms from a single gene thereby greatly increasing the diversity of the transcriptome and proteome. This process can be important in enabling the organism to cope with stressful conditions. Accurate identification of splice sites using RNA sequencing requires alignment to independent exonic positions within the genome, presenting bioinformatic challenges, particularly when using short read data. Although technological advances allow for the detection of splicing patterns on a genome-wide scale, very little is known about the extent of intraspecies variation in splicing patterns, particularly in response to environmental stressors. In this study, we used RNA-sequencing to study the molecular responses to acute copper exposure in three lineages of Daphnia pulex by focusing on the contribution of alternative splicing in addition to gene expression responses. RESULTS: By comparing the overall gene expression and splicing patterns among all 15 copper-exposed samples and 6 controls, we identified 588 differentially expressed (DE) genes and 16 differentially spliced (DS) genes. Most of the DS genes (13) were not found to be DE, suggesting unique transcriptional regulation in response to copper that went unnoticed with conventional DE analysis. To understand the influence of genetic background on gene expression and alternative splicing responses to Cu, each of the three lineages was analyzed separately. In contrast to the overall analysis, each lineage had a higher proportion of unique DS genes than DE genes suggesting that genetic background has a larger influence on DS than on DE. Gene Ontology analysis revealed that some pathways involved in stress response were jointly regulated by DS and DE genes while others were regulated by only transcription or only splicing. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest an important role for alternative splicing in shaping transcriptome diversity in response to metal exposure in Daphnia, highlighting the importance of integrating splicing analyses with gene expression surveys to characterize molecular pathways in evolutionary and environmental studies.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".