Two mechanisms of retinal photoreceptor plasticity underlie rapid adaptation to novel light environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fishes experience different light environments over short time periods that may require quick modulation of photoreceptor properties to optimize visual function. Previous research has shown that the relative expression of different visual pigment protein (opsin) transcripts can change within several days following exposure to new light environments, but whether such changes are mirrored by analogous modulation in opsin protein expression is unknown. Here, Atlantic halibut larvae and juveniles raised under white light were exposed to blue light for 1 week and their retina compared to that of controls, which remained under white light. Blue light-treated larvae showed increased expression of all cone opsin transcripts, except rh2, over controls. They also had longer outer segments, and higher density of long wavelength sensitive (L) cones in the dorsal retina. In contrast, only the lws transcript was upregulated in juveniles exposed to blue light compared to controls but their L cone density was greater throughout the retina. These results demonstrate two mechanisms of rapid photoreceptor plasticity as a function of developmental stage associated with improved perception of achromatic or chromatic contrasts in line with the animal's ecological needs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".