Transcriptomic effects of the <i>foraging</i> gene shed light on pathways of pleiotropy and plasticity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genes are often pleiotropic and plastic in their expression, features which increase and diversify the functionality of the genome. The foraging (for) gene in Drosophila melanogaster is highly pleiotropic and a long-standing model for studying individual differences in behavior and plasticity from ethological, evolutionary, and genetic perspectives. Its pleiotropy is known to be linked to its complex molecular structure; however, the downstream pathways and interactors remain mostly elusive. To uncover these pathways and interactors and gain a better understanding of how pleiotropy and plasticity are achieved at the molecular level, we explore the effects of different for alleles on gene expression at baseline and in response to 4 h of food deprivation, using RNA sequencing analysis in different Drosophila larval tissues. The results show tissue-specific transcriptomic dynamics influenced by for allelic variation and food deprivation, as well as genotype by treatment interactions. Differentially expressed genes yielded pathways linked to previously described for phenotypes and several potentially novel phenotypes. Together, these findings provide putative genes and pathways through which for might regulate its varied phenotypes in a pleiotropic, plastic, and gene-structure-dependent manner.
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".