Origins of variation in muscle cytochrome <i>c</i> oxidase activity within and between fish species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mitochondrial content, central to aerobic metabolism, is thought to be controlled by a few transcriptional master regulators, including nuclear respiratory factor 1 (NRF-1), NRF-2 and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ coactivator-1α (PGC-1α). Though well studied in mammals, the mechanisms by which these factors control mitochondrial content have been less studied in lower vertebrates. We evaluated the role of these transcriptional regulators in seasonal changes in white muscle cytochrome c oxidase (COX) activity in eight local fish species representing five families: Centrarchidae, Umbridae, Esocidae, Gasterosteidae and Cyprinidae. Amongst centrarchids, COX activity was significantly higher in winter for pumpkinseed (2-fold) and black crappie (1.3-fold) but not bluegill or largemouth bass. In esociforms, winter COX activity was significantly higher in central mudminnow (3.5-fold) but not northern pike. COX activity was significantly higher in winter-acclimatized brook stickleback (2-fold) and northern redbelly dace (3-fold). Though mudminnow COX activity increased in winter, lab acclimation to winter temperatures did not alter COX activity, suggesting a role for non-thermal cues. When mRNA was measured for putative master regulators of mitochondria, there was little evidence for a uniform relationship between COX activity and any of NRF-1, NRF-2α or PGC-1α mRNA levels Collectively, these studies argue against a simple temperature-dependent mitochondrial response ubiquitous in fish, and suggest that pathways which control mitochondrial content in fish may differ in important ways from those of the better studied mammals.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".