Heat shock proteins and hypometabolism: adaptive strategy for proteome preservation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kenneth B Storey, Janet M StoreyDepartments of Biology and Chemistry, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, CanadaAbstract: To survive under harsh environmental conditions many organisms retreat into hypometabolic states where metabolic rate may be reduced by 80% or more and energy use is reprioritized to emphasize key functions that sustain viability and provide cytoprotection. ATP-expensive activities, such as gene expression, protein turnover (synthesis and degradation), and the cell cycle, are largely shut down. As a consequence, mechanisms that stabilize the existing cellular proteome can become critical for long-term survival. Heat shock proteins (HSPs) are well-known for their actions as chaperones that act to fold new proteins or refold proteins that are damaged. Indeed, they are part of the “minimal stress proteome” that appears to be a ubiquitous response by all cells as they attempt, successfully or unsuccessfully, to deal with stress. The present review summarizes evidence that HSPs are also a conserved feature of natural animal hypometabolism including the phenomena of estivation, hibernation, diapause, cold-hardiness, anaerobiosis, and anhydrobiosis. That is, organisms that retreat into dormant or torpid states in anticipation that environmental conditions may become too difficult for normal life also integrate the use of HSPs to protect their proteome while hypometabolic. Multiple studies show a common upregulation of expression of hsp genes and/or HSP proteins prior to or during hypometabolism in organisms as diverse as ground squirrels, turtles, land snails, insects, and brine shrimp and in situations of both preprogrammed dormancies (eg, seasonal or life stage specific) and opportunistic hypometabolism (eg, triggered by desiccation or lack of oxygen). Hence, HSPs are not just a “shock” response that attempts to rescue cells from damaging stress but are a key protective strategy that is an integral component of natural states of torpor and dormancy.Keywords: chaperone proteins, metabolic rate depression, estivation, anaerobiosis, hibernation, diapause, cold-hardiness
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".