Seasonal effect on metabolism and mitochondrial supercomplex assembly in honey bees (Apis mellifera)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, an important decline of honey bee populations is observed, in part due to environmental variations caused by climate change. Particularly, increased temperatures during winter and spring bring forth new challenges, as the transition from winter to summer is crucial for the colony's survival. We have recently demonstrated that honey bee mitochondria undergo drastic changes between the winter and summer seasons, which is attributed to their different roles within the hive. Specifically, winter bees have lower CI-linked respiration but increased mtG3PDH- and CII-linked respiration. However we do not know whether and how this affects ATP and reactive oxygen species (ROS) production. Further, the regulation mechanisms behind this drastic change in phenotype is unknown. In this study, we investigated the seasonal differences in mitochondrial oxygen consumption, ATP production, and site-specific ROS production in honey bees (Apis mellifera). We also evaluated supercomplex assembly to determine if this could explain the changes observed in the mitochondrial parameters measured. Our results demonstrate that even though CI-linked respiration is diminished in winter bees, ATP production by CI is increased, suggesting that CI is more efficient in winter. Differences were also detected in terms of ROS production, with summer bees producing less ROS than all other season. In terms of supercomplex assembly, we are currently performing the analyses, which has never been done in honey bees, and will be included in this talk. We hypothesize that supercomplex assembly could shed light on the results described above, explaining the contrasting mitochondrial phenotypes observed between seasons.
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".