Genomic and Spectral Visual Adaptation in Southern Leopard Frogs during the Ontogenetic Transition from Aquatic to Terrestrial Light Environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Many animals have complex life cycles where larval and adult forms have distinct ecologies and habitats that impose different demands on their sensory systems. While the adaptive decoupling hypothesis predicts reduced genetic correlations between life stages, how sensory systems adapt across life stages at the molecular level is not well understood. Frogs are a compelling system to study this question in because most species rely on vision as both aquatic tadpoles and terrestrial adults, but these habitats present vastly different light environments. Here we used whole eye transcriptome sequencing to investigate differential expression between aquatic tadpoles and terrestrial juveniles of the southern leopard frog ( Lithobates sphenocephalus ). Because visual physiology changes with light levels, we also tested how constant light or dark exposure affected gene expression. We found 42% of genes were differentially expressed in the eyes of tadpoles versus juveniles, versus 5% for light/dark exposure. Analyses targeting a curated set of visual genes revealed significant differential expression between life stages in genes that control aspects of visual function and development, including spectral sensitivity and lens composition. Light/dark exposure had a significant effect on a smaller set of visual genes. Finally, microspectrophotometry of photoreceptors confirmed shifts in spectral sensitivity predicted by the expression results, consistent with adaptation to distinct light environments. Overall, we identified extensive expression-level differences in the eyes of tadpole and juvenile frogs related to observed morphological and physiological changes through metamorphosis, and corresponding adaptive shifts to optimize vision in aquatic versus terrestrial 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) | 0.002 | 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".