Natural selection has driven the recurrent loss of an immunity gene that protects Drosophila against a major natural parasite.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Polymorphisms in immunity genes can have large effects on susceptibility to infection. To understand the origins of this variation, we investigated the genetic basis of resistance to the parasitoid wasp Leptopilina boulardi in Drosophila melanogaster . A cis -regulatory polymorphism in the gene Lectin-24A abolishes expression after infection, strongly reducing survival. Other null mutations have arisen repeatedly in this gene, with additional loss-of-expression and premature stop codons segregating in nature. The frequency of these alleles varies greatly, and in some populations natural selection has driven them near to fixation. We conclude that there is a pleiotropic cost to Lectin-24A expression, and in some populations this outweighs the benefit of resistance, resulting in natural selection causing the repeated loss of this important immune defense. Significance Statement Genetic differences between individuals can have a large effect on susceptibility to infectious disease. We have identified a gene called Lectin-24A that is important in the immune response that protects fruit flies against one of their main natural enemies—parasitic wasps. However, in nature many flies carry mutated copies of this gene that are no longer functional. We found that the high frequency of these loss-of-function mutations can only be explained if they have a selective advantage in some populations. Therefore, we can conclude that this immune defiance is costly, and genetic variation in susceptibility is maintained because in some locations susceptible flies are fitter than resistant flies.
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".