Data from: Neural dysfunction correlates with heat coma and CTmax in Drosophila but does not set the boundaries for heat stress survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When heated, insects lose coordinated movement followed by the onset of heat coma (critical thermal maximum, CTmax). These traits are popular measures to quantify interspecific and intraspecific differences in insect heat tolerance, and CTmax correlates well with current species distributions of insects, including Drosophila. Here, we examined the function of the central nervous system (CNS) in five species of Drosophila with different heat tolerances, while they were exposed to either constant high temperature or a gradually increasing temperature (ramp). Tolerant species were able to preserve CNS function at higher temperatures and for longer durations than sensitive species, and similar differences were found for the behavioural indices (loss of coordination and onset of heat coma). Furthermore, the timing and temperature (constant and ramp exposure, respectively) for loss of coordination or complete coma coincided with the occurrence of spreading depolarisation (SD) events in the CNS. These SD events disrupt neurological function and silence the CNS, suggesting that CNS failure is the primary cause of impaired coordination and heat coma. Heat mortality occurs soon after heat coma in insects; to examine whether CNS failure could also be the proximal cause of heat death, we used selective heating of the head (CNS) and abdomen (visceral tissues). When comparing the temperature causing 50% mortality (LT50) of each body part versus that of the whole animal, we found that the head was not particularly heat sensitive compared with the abdomen. Accordingly, it is unlikely that nervous failure is the principal/proximate cause of heat mortality in Drosophila.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.142 | 0.054 |
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".