Functional and Proteomic Insights into Aculeata Venoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aculeate hymenopterans use their venom for a variety of different purposes. The venom of solitary aculeates paralyze and preserve prey without killing it, whereas social aculeates utilize their venom in defence of their colony. These distinct applications of venom suggest that its components and their functions are also likely to differ. This study investigates a range of solitary and social species across Aculeata. We combined electrophoretic, mass spectrometric, and transcriptomic techniques to characterize the compositions of venoms from an incredibly diverse taxon. In addition, in vitro assays shed light on their biological activities. Although there were many common components identified in the venoms of species with different social behavior, there were also significant variations in the presence and activity of enzymes such as phospholipase A2s and serine proteases and the cytotoxicity of the venoms. Social aculeate venom showed higher presence of peptides that cause damage and pain in victims. The venom-gland transcriptome from the European honeybee (Apis mellifera) contained highly conserved toxins which match those identified by previous investigations. In contrast, venoms from less-studied taxa returned limited results from our proteomic databases, suggesting that they contain unique toxins.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".