Abundance, diversity and evolution of tyrosinase enzymes involved in the adhesive systems of mussels and tubeworms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The blue mussel ( Mytilus edulis ) and the honeycomb tubeworm ( Sabellaria alveolata ) have evolved similar adhesive systems to cope with the hydrodynamic conditions of the intertidal environment where they live. Both organisms can establish a permanent adhesion through the secretion of adhesive proteins rich in DOPA (3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine), a post-translationally modified amino acid playing essential roles in interfacial adhesion and bulk cohesion. DOPA is produced by the hydroxylation of tyrosine residues by tyrosinase enzymes, which can also in some cases oxidise it further into dopaquinone Compared to the detailed knowledge available on mussel and tubeworm adhesive proteins, little information exists about the tyrosinases involved in their adhesive systems. By combining different molecular analyses, a catalogue of tyrosinase candidates potentially involved in the adhesive systems of M. edulis and S. alveolata was identified. Some of these candidates were shown to be expressed in the adhesive glands by in situ hybridization, with a high gland-specificity in mussels but not in tubeworms. The diversity of tyrosinases highlighted in the two species suggests the coexistence of different functions (monophenol monooxygenase or catechol oxidase activity) or different substrate specificities. However, the exact role of the different enzymes needs to be further investigated. Phylogenetic analyses support the hypothesis of independent expansions and parallel evolution of tyrosinases involved in adhesive protein maturation in both lineages, supporting the convergent evolution of their DOPA-based adhesion.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".