Larval transcriptomic responses of a stony coral, Acropora tenuis, during initial contact with the native symbiont, Symbiodinium microadriaticum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although numerous dinoflagellate species (Family Symbiodiniaceae) are present in coral reef environments, Acropora corals tend to select a single species, Symbiodinium microadriaticum, in early life stages, even though this species is rarely found in mature colonies. In order to identify molecular mechanisms involved in initial contact with native symbionts, we analyzed transcriptomic responses of Acropora tenuis larvae at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 h after their first contact with S. microadriaticum, as well as with non-native symbionts, including the non-symbiotic S. natans and the occasional symbiont, S. tridacnidorum. Some gene expression changes were detected in larvae inoculated with non-native symbionts at 1 h post-inoculation, but those returned to baseline levels afterward. In contrast, when larvae were exposed to native symbionts, we found that the number of differentially expressed genes gradually increased in relation to inoculation time. As a specific response to native symbionts, upregulation of pattern recognition receptor-like and transporter genes, and suppression of cellular function genes related to immunity and apoptosis, were exclusively observed. These findings indicate that coral larvae recognize differences between symbionts, and when the appropriate symbionts infect, they coordinate gene expression to establish stable mutualism.
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".