MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Molecular Mechanisms of Winter Survival

2022· review· en· W4303473645 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Entomology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyDiapauseCold stressCryoprotectantEvolutionary biologyEcologyStressorAcclimatizationGeneGeneticsCryopreservationNeuroscienceLarva

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Winter provides many challenges for insects, including direct injury to tissues and energy drain due to low food availability. As a result, the geographic distribution of many species is tightly coupled to their ability to survive winter. In this review, we summarize molecular processes associated with winter survival, with a particular focus on coping with cold injury and energetic challenges. Anticipatory processes such as cold acclimation and diapause cause wholesale transcriptional reorganization that increases cold resistance and promotes cryoprotectant production and energy storage. Molecular responses to low temperature are also dynamic and include signaling events during and after a cold stressor to prevent and repair cold injury. In addition, we highlight mechanisms that are subject to selection as insects evolve to variable winter conditions. Based on current knowledge, despite common threads, molecular mechanisms of winter survival vary considerably across species, and taxonomic biases must be addressed to fully appreciate the mechanistic basis of winter survival across the insect phylogeny.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.286 · 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