A comparison of aquaporin expression in mosquito larvae (Aedes aegypti) that develop in hypo-osmotic freshwater and iso-osmotic brackish water
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mosquito Aedes aegypti vectors the arboviral diseases yellow fever, dengue, Zika and chikungunya. Larvae are usually found developing in freshwater; however, more recently they have been increasingly found in brackish water, potential habitats which are traditionally ignored by mosquito control programs. Aedes aegypti larvae are osmo-regulators maintaining their hemolymph osmolarity in a range of ~ 250 to 300 mOsmol l-1. In freshwater, the larvae must excrete excess water while conserving ions while in brackish water, they must alleviate an accumulation of salts. The compensatory physiological mechanisms must involve the transport of ions and water but little is known about the water transport mechanisms in the osmoregulatory organs of these larvae. Water traverses cellular membranes predominantly through transmembrane proteins named aquaporins (AQPs) and Aedes aegypti possesses 6 AQP homologues (AaAQP1 to 6). The objective of this study was to determine if larvae that develop in freshwater or brackish water have differential aquaporin expression in osmoregulatory organs, which could inform us about the relative importance and function of aquaporins to mosquito survival under these different osmotic conditions. We found that AaAQP transcript abundance was similar in organs of freshwater and brackish water mosquito larvae. Furthermore, in the Malpighian tubules and hindgut AaAQP protein abundance was unaffected by the rearing conditions, but in the gastric caeca the protein level of one aquaporin, AaAQP1 was elevated in brackish water. We found that AaAQP1 was expressed apically while AaAQP4 and AaAQP5 were found to be apical and/or basal in the epithelia of osmoregulatory organs. Overall, the results suggest that aquaporin expression in the osmoregulatory organs is mostly consistent between larvae that are developing in freshwater and brackish water. This suggests that aquaporins may not have major roles in adapting to longterm survival in brackish water or that aquaporin function may be regulated by other mechanisms like post-translational modifications.
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".