Comparative study of thermal tolerance and other physiological characteristics in <i>C. briggsae</i> and <i>C. elegans</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The nematode Caenorhabditis briggsae ( C. briggsae ) is routinely used in genetic and evolutionary studies involving its well-known cousin, C. elegans . The two species are morphologically almost identical but exhibit significant developmental, genetic, and genomic differences. The AF16 isolate of C. briggsae is an established reference strain. We used additional wild isolates from tropical and temperate regions to perform a comparative study of phenotypic characters. The analysis revealed both intra (between C. briggsae isolates) and inter (compared to C. elegans N2) species variability in dimensions and opacity. Our data also showed that C. briggsae isolates prefer higher temperatures for growth, reproduction, and survival than C. elegans N2. The preference for higher temperatures further translated into a higher tolerance for heat stress, as evidenced by its survival at temperatures lethal to N2. Interestingly, we found that while C. briggsae is more resistant to heat and shows greater sensitivity to other forms of stress, namely oxidative and osmotic, compared to C. elegans . The heat resistance of C. briggsae was correlated with efficient upregulation of the cytosolic chaperon hsp-16.2 . Overall, this work has revealed significant differences in stress sensitivities between the two nematodes and forms the basis to investigate changes in underlying mechanisms that affect their stress responses.
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 | 0.001 | 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".