Coping with Thermal Challenges: Physiological Adaptations to Environmental Temperatures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Temperature profoundly influences physiological responses in animals, primarily due to the effects on biochemical reaction rates. Since physiological responses are often exemplified by their rate dependency (e.g., rate of blood flow, rate of metabolism, rate of heat production, and rate of ion pumping), the study of temperature adaptations has a long history in comparative and evolutionary physiology. Animals may either defend a fairly constant temperature by recruiting biochemical mechanisms of heat production and utilizing physiological responses geared toward modifying heat loss and heat gain from the environment, or utilize biochemical modifications to allow for physiological adjustments to temperature. Biochemical adaptations to temperature involve alterations in protein structure that compromise the effects of increased temperatures on improving catalytic enzyme function with the detrimental influences of higher temperature on protein stability. Temperature has acted to shape the responses of animal proteins in manners that generally preserve turnover rates at animals' normal, or optimal, body temperatures. Physiological responses to cold and warmth differ depending on whether animals maintain elevated body temperatures (endothermic) or exhibit minimal internal heat production (ectothermic). In both cases, however, these mechanisms involve regulated neural and hormonal over heat flow to the body or heat flow within the body. Examples of biochemical responses to temperature in endotherms involve metabolic uncoupling mechanisms that decrease metabolic efficiency with the outcome of producing heat, whereas ectothermic adaptations to temperature are best exemplified by the numerous mechanisms that allow for the tolerance or avoidance of ice crystal formation at temperatures below 0°C.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".