Flexible Thermal Sensitivity of Mitochondrial Oxygen Consumption and Substrate Oxidation in Flying Insect Species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mitochondria have been suggested to be paramount for temperature adaptation in insects. Considering the large range of environments colonized by this taxon, we hypothesized that species surviving large temperature changes would be those with the most flexible mitochondria. We thus investigated the responses of mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) to temperature in three flying insects: the honeybee (Apis mellifera carnica), the fruit fly (Drosophila melanogaster) and the Colorado potato beetle (Leptinotarsa decemlineata). Specifically, we measured oxygen consumption in permeabilized flight muscles of these species at 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42 and 45°C, sequentially using complex I substrates, proline, succinate, and glycerol-3-phosphate (G3P). Complex I respiration rates (CI-OXPHOS) were very sensitive to temperature in honeybees and fruit flies with high oxygen consumption at mid-range temperatures but a sharp decline at high temperatures. Proline oxidation triggers a major increase in respiration only in potato beetles, following the same pattern as CI-OXPHOS for honeybees and fruit flies. Moreover, both succinate and G3P oxidation allowed an important increase in respiration at high temperatures in honeybees and fruit flies (and to a lesser extent in potato beetles). However, when reaching 45°C, this G3P-induced respiration rate dropped dramatically in fruit flies. These results demonstrate that mitochondrial functions are more resilient to high temperatures in honeybees compared to fruit flies. They also indicate an important but species-specific mitochondrial flexibility for substrate oxidation to sustain high oxygen consumption levels at high temperatures and suggest previously unknown adaptive mechanisms of flying insects’ mitochondria to temperature.
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".