The influence of feeding on aerial and aquatic oxygen consumption, nitrogenous waste excretion, and metabolic fuel usage in the African lungfish, Protopterus annectens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied the utilization of air versus water as a respiratory medium for O2consumption (Mo2) in the bimodally breathing African lungfish, Protopterus annectens (Owen, 1839), (151.2 ± 3.7 g) at 26–28 °C. We also investigated the impact of a single meal on this respiratory allocation and nitrogenous waste excretion in lungfish entrained to a 48 h feeding cycle. Correction for the “microbial blank” was found to be critically important in assessing the aquatic component of Mo2. After correction, total Mo2was low (~1000 μmol·kg–1·h–1), and lungfish took about 40% of Mo2from water and 60% from air. Following a meal of chironomid larvae (3.3% of body mass), Mo2values from both air and water increased in proportion over the first 3 h and continued to increase to a peak at 5–8 h postfeeding, at which point total Mo2(still 40% from water) was approximately 2.5-fold greater than the prefeeding level. When the same fish, entrained to the same 48 h feeding regime, were fasted, Mo2declined then later increased prior to the next anticipated feeding. In fed fish, the elevation in Mo2relative to fasted values was approximately 3-fold at 0–3 h and 9-fold at 5–8 h. This specific dynamic action (SDA) effect lasted until 23–26 h and amounted to only 9.5% of the oxycalorific content of the ingested meal. N-waste efflux was only slightly elevated after feeding, where there was a tendency for greater urea–N excretion (significant at 42–48 h); however, the lungfish remained ammoniotelic overall during the 48 h postfeeding period.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".