Physiological Properties of Zebrafish Embryonic Red and White Muscle Fibers During Early Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The zebrafish is a model organism for studies of vertebrate muscle differentiation and development. However, an understanding of fish muscle physiology during this period is limited. We examined the membrane, contractile, electrical coupling, and synaptic properties of embryonic red (ER) and white (EW) muscle fibers in developing zebrafish from 1 to 5 days postfertilization. Resting membrane potentials were -73 mV in 1 day ER and -78 mV in 1 day EW muscle and depolarized 17 and 7 mV, respectively, by 5 days. Neither fiber type exhibited action potentials. Current-voltage relationships were linear in EW fibers and day 1 ER fibers but were outwardly rectifying in some ER fibers at 3 to 5 days. Both ER and EW fibers were contractile at all ages examined (1 to 5 days) and could follow trains of electrical stimulation of up to 30 Hz without fatiguing for up to 5 min. Synaptic activity consisting of miniature endplate potentials (mEPPs) was observed at the earliest ages examined (1.2-1. 4 days) in both ER and EW fibers. Synaptic activity increased in frequency, and mEPP amplitudes were larger by 5 days. Miniature EPP rise times and half-widths decreased in ER fibers by 5 days, while EW fiber mEPPs showed fast kinetics as early as 1.2-1.4 days. ER and EW muscle fibers showed extensive dye coupling but not heterologous (red-white) coupling. Dye coupling decreased by 3 days yet remained at 5 days. Somites were electrically coupling, and this allowed filtered synaptic potentials to spread from myotome to myotome. It is concluded that at early developmental stages the physiological properties of ER and EW muscle are similar but not identical and are optimized to the patterns of swimming observed at these stages.
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".