The effect of temperature and acclimation period on repeat swimming performance in cutthroat trout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hatchery cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki clarki were used to examine the effects of 48 h and 3 week temperature acclimation periods on critical swimming speed (Ucrit). The Ucrit was determined for fish at acclimation temperatures of 7, 14 and 18° C using two consecutive ramp‐Ucrit tests in mobile Brett‐type swim tunnels. An additional group was tested at the stock's ambient rearing temperature of 10° C. The length of the temperature acclimation period had no significant effect on either the first or the second Ucrit(Ucrit‐1 and Ucrit‐2, respectively) or on the recovery ratio (the quotient of Ucrit‐2 Ucrit‐1−1). As anticipated, there was a significant positive relationship between Ucrit‐1 and temperature (P < 0·01) for both acclimation periods, and an increasing, though non‐significant, trend between Ucrit‐2 and temperature (P = 0·10). Acclimation temperature had no significant effect (P = 0·71) on the recovery ratio. These results indicate that a 48 h acclimation to experimental temperatures within the range of −3 to +8° C of the acclimation temperature may be sufficient in studies of swimming performance with this species. This ability to acclimate rapidly is probably adaptive for cutthroat trout and other species that occupy thermally variable environments.
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 | 0.000 | 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".