Gill morphology and acute hypoxia: responses of mitochondria-rich, pavement, and mucous cells in the Amazonian oscar (<i>Astronotus ocellatus</i>) and the rainbow trout (<i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i>), two species with very different approaches to the osmo-respiratory compromise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hypoxia-intolerant rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum, 1792)) exhibits increased branchial ion permeability and Na+influx during acute exposure to moderate hypoxia (Po2 = 80 torr; 1 torr = 133.3224 Pa), manifesting the usual trade-off between gas exchange and electrolyte conservation. In contrast, the hypoxia-tolerant oscar ( Astronotus ocellatus (Agassiz, 1831)) is unusual in exhibiting decreased branchial ion permeability to ions and Na+influx during acute exposure to severe hypoxia (Po2 = 10–20 torr). These different physiological approaches to the osmo-respiratory compromise correlate with rapid, oppositely directed changes in gill morphology. In oscar, pavement cells (PVCs) expanded, partially covering neighboring mitochondria-rich cells (MRCs), which were recessed and reduced in size. Those remaining open were transformed from “shallow-basin” to “deep-hole” forms with smaller openings, deeper apical crypts, and smaller numbers of subapical microvesicles, changes that were largely reversed during normoxic recovery. In contrast, moderate hypoxia caused outward bulging of MRCs in rainbow trout with increases in size, surface exposure, and number of subapical microvesicles, accompanied by PVC retraction. These changes were partially reversed during normoxic recovery. In both rainbow trout and oscar, hypoxia caused discharge of mucus from enlarged mucous cells (MCs). Rapid, divergent morphological changes play an important role in explaining two very different physiological approaches to the osmo-respiratory compromise.
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".