Tribute to R. G. Boutilier: The effect of size on the physiological and behavioural responses of oscar,<i>Astronotus ocellatus</i>, to hypoxia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The physiological and behavioural responses of two size groups of oscar (Astronotus ocellatus) to hypoxia were studied. The physiological responses were tested by measuring M(O(2)) during decreasing environmental oxygen tensions. Larger oscars were better able to maintain oxygen consumption during a decrease in P(O(2)), regulating routine M(O(2)) to a significantly lower P(O(2)) threshold (50 mmHg) than smaller oscars (70 mmHg). Previous studies have also demonstrated a longer survival time of large oscars exposed to extreme hypoxia, coupled with a greater anaerobic enzymatic capability. Large oscars began aquatic surface respiration (ASR) at the oxygen tension at which the first significant decrease in M(O(2)) was seen (50 mmHg). Interestingly, smaller oscars postponed ASR to around 22 mmHg, well beyond the P(O(2)) at which they switched from oxyregulation to oxyconformation. Additionally, when given the choice between an hypoxic environment containing aquatic macrophyte shelter and an open normoxic environment, small fish showed a greater preference for the hypoxic environment. Thus shelter from predators appears particularly important for juveniles, who may accept a greater physiological compromise in exchange for safety. In response to hypoxia without available shelter, larger fish reduced their level of activity (with the exception of aggressive encounters) to aid metabolic suppression whereas smaller oscars increased their activity, with the potential benefit of finding oxygen-rich areas.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.066 | 0.070 |
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".