The Genetic Component of the Forced Diving Bradycardia Response in Mammals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We contrasted the forced diving bradycardia between two genetically similar (inbred) rat strains (Fischer and Buffalo), compared to that of outbred rats (Wistar). The animals were habituated to forced diving for 4 weeks. Each animal was then tested during one 40 s dive on each of 3 days. The heart rate (f(H)) was measured before, during, and after each dive. Fischer and Buffalo exhibited marked difference in dive bradycardia (Fischer: 120.9 ± 14.0 beats min(-1) vs. Buffalo: 92.8 ± 12.8 beats min(-1), P < 0.05). Outbred rats showed an intermediate response (103.0 ± 30.9 beats min(-1)) but their between-animal variability in mean dive f(H) and pre-diving resting f(H) were higher than the inbred strains (P < 0.05), which showed no difference (P > 0.05). The decreased variability in f(H) in inbred rats as compared with the outbred group indicates that reduced genetic variability minimizes variability of the diving bradycardia between individuals. Heritability within strains was assessed by the repeatability (R) index and was 0.93 ± 0.05 for the outbred, 0.84 ± 0.16 for Buffalo, and 0.80 ± 0.12 for Fischer rats for f(H) during diving. Our results suggest that a portion of the mammalian diving bradycardia may be a heritable trait.
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".