Evolutionary analyses of visual opsin genes in frogs and toads: Diversity, duplication, and positive selection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Among major vertebrate groups, anurans (frogs and toads) are understudied with regard to their visual systems, and little is known about variation among species that differ in ecology. We sampled North American anurans representing diverse evolutionary and life histories that likely possess visual systems adapted to meet different ecological needs. Using standard molecular techniques, visual opsin genes, which encode the protein component of visual pigments, were obtained from anuran retinas. Additionally, we extracted the visual opsins from publicly available genome and transcriptome assemblies, further increasing the phylogenetic and ecological diversity of our dataset to 33 species in total. We found that anurans consistently express four visual opsin genes ( RH1 , LWS , SWS1 , and SWS2 , but not RH2 ) even though reported photoreceptor complements vary widely among species. The proteins encoded by these genes showed considerable sequence variation among species, including at sites known to shift the spectral sensitivity of visual pigments in other vertebrates and had conserved substitutions that may be related to dim‐light adaptation. Using molecular evolutionary analyses of selection (d N /d S ) we found significant evidence for positive selection at a subset of sites in the dim‐light rod opsin gene RH1 and the long wavelength sensitive cone opsin LWS . The function of sites inferred to be under positive selection are largely unknown, but a few are likely to affect spectral sensitivity and other visual pigment functions based on proximity to previously identified sites in other vertebrates. We also found the first evidence of visual opsin duplication in an amphibian with the duplication of the LWS gene in the African bullfrog, which had distinct LWS copies on the sex chromosomes suggesting the possibility of sex‐specific visual adaptation. Taken together, our results indicate that ecological factors, such as habitat and life history, as well as behavior, may be driving changes to anuran visual systems.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".