Discrimination between transient and persistent bacteria harbored in the digestive tract of larval <i>Galleria mellonella</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A significant emphasis of insect symbiont research has focused on the digestive tract and elucidating whether bacteria colonize and proliferate or transiently pass through is integral to our understanding of microbial community structure and host–microbe interactions. The larval stages of the greater wax moth, Galleria mellonella (Linnaeus) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), have become increasingly used in studies that are heavily influenced by host–microbiome dynamics (e.g., plastic biodegradation and innate immunity). However, it is presently unclear whether continual bacterial recruitment is required to sustain the bacterial assemblages, and the extent by which gut bacterial flora is a reflection of their food substrate. Therefore, the objective of this study was to discern between transient and more persistent gut microbes harbored by G . mellonella larvae, and to evaluate their relative contributions to microbial diversity and abundance. We used 16S rRNA sequencing to characterize and compare the bacteriomes of G . mellonella to their natural honeycomb diet throughout larval development, as well as to caterpillars subjected to a 4‐day starvation period. Then, we used qPCR to measure relative bacterial abundances at each instar. Our results indicate larval gut bacterial composition and abundance are predominantly diet‐driven, with a myriad of bacterial genera seemingly transiently present. However, several genera (e.g., Ralstonia , Pelomonas , and Cutibacterium ) appear to be more permanent fixtures, presumably colonizing and proliferating in the digestive tract. Moreover, some bacterial genera co‐occur, forming non‐random associations that may be indicative of functional synergies. Overall, this study advances our knowledge of lepidopteran gut microbial dynamics and provides valuable information for an emerging invertebrate model.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".