Data from: Gene expression plasticity evolves in response to colonization of freshwater lakes in threespine stickleback
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phenotypic plasticity is predicted to facilitate individual survival and/or evolve in response to novel environments. Plasticity that facilitates survival should both permit colonization and act as a buffer against further evolution, with contemporary and derived forms predicted to be similarly plastic for a suite of traits. On the other hand, given the importance of plasticity in maintaining internal homeostasis, derived populations that encounter greater environmental heterogeneity should evolve greater plasticity. We tested the evolutionary significance of phenotypic plasticity in coastal British Columbian postglacial populations of threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) that evolved under greater seasonal extremes in temperature after invading freshwater lakes from the sea. Two ancestral (contemporary marine) and two derived (contemporary freshwater) populations of stickleback were raised near their thermal tolerance extremes, 7°C and 22°C. Gene expression plasticity was estimated for more than 14 000 genes. Over five thousand genes were similarly plastic in marine and freshwater stickleback, but freshwater populations exhibited significantly more genes with plastic expression than marine populations. Furthermore, several of the loci shown to exhibit gene expression plasticity have been previously implicated in the adaptive evolution of freshwater populations, including a gene involved in mitochondrial regulation (PPARAa). Collectively, these data provide molecular evidence that highlights the importance of plasticity in colonization and adaptation to new environments.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.006 |
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".