Myotropic Peptides in Drosophila Melanogaster And The Genes That Encode Them
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Myotropic peptides are structurally dissimilar; thus, they comprise different families. The cellular expressions of myotropins suggest they act as hormones, transmitters, and modulators of numerous biological processes. Drosophila melanogaster allatostatin (AST), FMRFamide-containing, dromyosuppressin (DMS), and drosulfakinin (DSK) peptides represent four different myotropin families. A different gene encodes each of these four myotropin families. D. melanogaster AST, FMRFamide-containing, DMS, and DSK peptides are present in neural and gut tissue, but are not all expressed in the same cells. These four families of myotropins affect spontaneous contractions of gut, heart, and/or reproductive tissue, but their effects are dissimilar in magnitude and time course. Based on their structures, genes, distributions, and activities, the synthesis and release of these D. melanogaster myotropins are likely governed by different sensory inputs and regulatory mechanisms. The differences in structures, precursors, cellular expressions, and activities are consistent with the conclusion that they do not play redundant roles in their effects on the frequency of muscle contractions. Orthologs of these D. melanogaster myotropins exist in other animal species; thus, research on the mechanisms involved in their production and processing, functions, and signaling may be widely applicable. Here, we review research on D. melanogaster AST, FMRFamide-containing, myosuppressin, and sulfakinin peptides.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".