MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3182201159 · doi:10.3390/ijerph18147508

The Foraging Gene, a New Environmental Adaptation Player Involved in Xenobiotic Detoxification

2021· article· en· W3182201159 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Marcel Amichot, Sophie Tarès

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsXenobioticForagingDrosophila melanogasterBiologyAdaptation (eye)Cytochrome P450GeneMelanogasterDrosophila (subgenus)Detoxification (alternative medicine)Gene expressionGeneticsCell biologyEnzymeEcologyBiochemistryNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Foraging is vital for animals, especially for food. In Drosophila melanogaster, this behavior is controlled by the foraging gene (for) which encodes a cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP)-dependent protein kinase (PKG). In wild populations of Drosophila, rover individuals that exhibit long foraging trails and sitter individuals that exhibit short ones coexist and are characterized by high and low levels of PKG activity, respectively. We, therefore, postulated that rover flies are more exposed to environmental stresses, including xenobiotics contamination, than sitter flies. We then tested whether these flies differed in their ability to cope with xenobiotics by exposing them to insecticides from different chemical families. We performed toxicological tests and measured the activity and expression levels of different classes of detoxification enzymes. We have shown that a link exists between the for gene and certain cytochrome P450-dependent activities and that the expression of the insecticide-metabolizing cytochrome P450 Cyp6a2 is controlled by the for gene. An unsuspected regulatory pathway of P450s expression involving the for gene in Drosophila is revealed and we demonstrate its involvement in adaptation to chemicals in the environment. This work can serve as a basis for reconsidering adaptation to xenobiotics in light of the behavior of species, including humans.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.135
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health→Same topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research→French-language works237,207→