<i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i> as a Promising Model Organism in Chronobiology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Circadian rhythms represent an adaptive feature, ubiquitously found in nature, which grants living beings the ability to anticipate daily variations in their environment. They have been found in a multitude of organisms, ranging from bacteria to fungi, plants, and animals. Circadian rhythms are generated by endogenous clocks that can be entrained daily by environmental cycles such as light and temperature. The molecular machinery of circadian clocks includes a transcriptional-translational feedback loop that takes approximately 24 h to complete. Drosophila melanogaster has been a model organism of choice to understand the molecular basis of circadian clocks. However, alternative animal models are also being adopted, each offering their respective experimental advantages. The nematode Caenorhabditis elegans provides an excellent model for genetics and neuro-behavioral studies, which thanks to its ease of use and manipulation, as well as availability of genetic data and mutant strains, is currently used as a novel model for circadian research. Here, we aim to evaluate C. elegans as a model for chronobiological studies, focusing on its strengths and weaknesses while reviewing the available literature. Possible zeitgebers (including light and temperature) are also discussed. Determining the molecular bases and the neural circuitry involved in the central pacemaker of the C. elegans’ clock will contribute to the understanding of its circadian system, becoming a novel model organism for the study of diseases due to alterations of the circadian cycle.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".