Cytoplasmic to nuclear localization of fatty-acid binding protein correlates with specific forms of long-term memory in<i>Drosophila</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We recently reported evidence implicating fatty-acid binding protein (Fabp) in the control of sleep and memory formation. We used Drosophila melanogaster to examine the relationship between sleep and memory through transgenic overexpression of mouse brain-Fabp, Fabp7, or the Drosophila Fabp homologue, (dFabp). The key findings are that, (1) a genetically induced increase in daytime consolidated sleep (naps) correlates with an increase in cognitive performance, and (2) a late “window” of memory consolidation occurs days after the traditionally understood “synaptic” consolidation. Exactly how Fabp-signaling may be involved in converting normal to enhanced long-term memory (LTM) is not known. Here we describe additional data which support relative subcellular compartmental localization of Fabp in regulating stage associations of different forms of memory in Drosophila. Anesthesia resistant memory (ARM) is a longer lasting memory that is produced by massed training, but unlike LTM produced by spaced training, it is insensitive to protein synthesis inhibitors and does not persist as long. We observed that the ratio of ARM to LTM performance index of Fabp7-transgenic flies is proportional to the relative cytoplasmic to nuclear Fabp7 expression level. These data suggest a common lipid-signaling cascade exists between phases of memory formation previously thought to be molecularly distinct.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".