MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225412055 · doi:10.1186/s12862-022-01960-8

The evolution of insect visual opsin genes with specific consideration of the influence of ocelli and life history traits

2022· article· en· W4225412055 on OpenAlexafffund
Quentin Guignard, Jeremy D. Allison, Bernard Slippers

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Ecology and Evolution · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceNatural Resources CanadaU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsSimple eye in invertebratesOpsinBiologyEvolutionary biologyPhylogeneticsPhylogenetic treeInsectConvergent evolutionZoologyGeneBotanyGeneticsRhodopsin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Visual opsins are expressed in the compound eyes and ocelli of insects and enable light detection. Three distinct phylogenetic groups of visual opsins are found in insects, named long (LW), short (SW) and ultraviolet (UV) wavelength sensitive opsins. Recently, the LW group was found to be duplicated into the LW2b and the LW2a opsins. The expression of LW2b opsins is ocelli specific in some insects (e.g., bees, cricket, scorpion flies), but the gene was not found in other orders possessing three or less ocelli (e.g., dragonflies, beetles, moths, bugs). In flies, two LW2b homologs have been characterised, with one expressed in the ocelli and the other in the compound eyes. To date, it remains unclear which evolutionary forces have driven gains and losses of LW opsins in insects. Here we take advantage of the recent rapid increase in available sequence data (i.e., from insect genomes, targeted PCR amplification, RNAseq) to characterize the phylogenetic relationships of 1000 opsin sequences in 18 orders of Insects. The resulting phylogeny discriminates between four main groups of opsins, and onto this phylogeny we mapped relevant morphological and life history traits. RESULTS: Our results demonstrate a conserved LW2b opsin only present in insects with three ocelli. Only two groups (Brachycera and Odonata) possess more than one LW2b opsin, likely linked to their life history. In flies, we hypothesize that the duplication of the LW2b opsin occurred after the transition from aquatic to terrestrial larvae. During this transition, higher flies (Brachycera) lost a copy of the LW2a opsin, still expressed and duplicated in the compound eyes of lower flies (Nematocera). In higher flies, the LW2b opsin has been duplicated and expressed in the compound eyes while the ocelli and the LW2b opsin were lost in lower flies. In dragonflies, specialisation of flight capabilities likely drove the diversification of the LW2b visual opsins. CONCLUSION: The presence of the LW2b opsin in insects possessing three ocelli suggests a role in specific flight capabilities (e.g., stationary flight). This study provides the most complete view of the evolution of visual opsin genes in insects yet, and provides new insight into the influence of ocelli and life history traits on opsin evolution in insects.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations34
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Ecology and EvolutionSame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207