Application of RNA Interference Technology to Acroporid Juvenile Corals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerous genes involved in calcification, algal endosymbiosis, and the stress response have been identified in corals by large-scale gene expression analysis, but functional analysis of those genes is lacking. There are few experimental examples of gene expression manipulation in corals, such as gene knockdown by RNA interference (RNAi). The purpose of this study is to establish an RNAi method for coral juveniles. As a first trial, the genes encoding green fluorescent protein (GFP, an endogenous fluorophore expressed by corals) and thioredoxin (TRX, a stress response gene) were selected for knockdown. Synthesized double-stranded RNAs (dsRNAs) corresponding to GFP and TRX were transformed into planula larvae by lipofection method to attempt RNAi. Real-time PCR analysis to verify knockdown showed that GFP and TRX expression levels tended to decrease with each dsRNA treatment (not significant). In addition, stress exposure experiments following RNAi treatment revealed that planulae with TRX knockdown exhibited increased mortality at elevated temperatures. In GFP-knockdown corals, decreased GFP fluorescence was observed. However, the effect of GFP-knockdown was confirmed only in the coral at the initial stages of larval metamorphosis into polyps, but not in planulae and 1 month-old budding polyps. This study showed that lipofection RNAi can be applied to coral planulae and polyps after settlement, and that this method provides a useful tool to modify expression of genes involved in stress tolerance and fluorescence emission of the corals.
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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".