Investigating the thermal sensitivity of key enzymes involved in the energetic metabolism of three insect species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The metabolic responses of insects to high temperatures have been linked to their mitochondrial substrate oxidation capacity. However, the mechanism behind this mitochondrial flexibility is not well understood. Here, we used three insect species with different thermal tolerances (the honey bee, Apis mellifera; the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster; and the potato beetle, Leptinotarsa decemlineata) to characterize the thermal sensitivity of different metabolic enzymes. Specifically, we measured activity of enzymes involved in glycolysis (hexokinase, HK; pyruvate kinase, PK; and lactate dehydrogenase, LDH), pyruvate oxidation and the tricarboxylic acid cycle (pyruvate dehydrogenase, PDH; citrate synthase, CS; malate dehydrogenase, MDH; and aspartate aminotransferase, AAT), and the electron transport system (Complex I, CI; Complex II, CII; mitochondrial glycerol-3-phosphate dehydrogenase, mG3PDH; proline dehydrogenase, ProDH; and Complex IV, CIV), as well as that of ATP synthase (CV) at 18, 24, 30, 36, 42 and 45°C. Our results show that at high temperature, all three species have significantly increased activity of enzymes linked to FADH2 oxidation, specifically CII and mG3PDH. In fruit flies and honey bees, this coincides with a significant decrease of PDH and CS activity, respectively, that would limit NADH production. This is in line with the switch from NADH-linked substrates to FADH2-linked substrates previously observed with mitochondrial oxygen consumption. Thus, we demonstrate that even though the three insect species have a different metabolic regulation, a similar response to high temperature involving CII and mG3PDH is observed, denoting the importance of these proteins for thermal tolerance in insects.
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) | 0.000 | 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".