Development of oxygen sensing in the gills of zebrafish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have described the morphology, innervation and O(2)-chemoreceptive properties of neuroepithelial cells (NECs) of the zebrafish gill filaments. The present work describes the ontogenesis of these cells, and the formation of functional O(2)-sensing pathways in developing zebrafish. Confocal immunofluorescence was performed on whole-mount gill preparations using antibodies against serotonin (5-HT) and a zebrafish-derived neuronal marker (zn-12) to identify the appearance and innervation of gill NECs during larval stages. NECs were first expressed in gill filament primordia of larvae at 5 days postfertilization (d.p.f.) and were fully innervated by 7 d.p.f. In vivo ventilation frequency analysis revealed that a behavioural response to hypoxia (11.2+/-2.8 min(-1)) developed in embryos as early as 2 d.p.f., and a significant increase (P<0.05) in the ventilatory response to hypoxia (200.8+/-23.0 min(-1)) coincided with innervation of NECs of the filaments. In addition, exogenous application of quinidine, a blocker of O(2)-sensitive background K(+) channels in NECs, induced hyperventilation in adults in a dose-dependent manner and revealed the development of a quinidine-sensitive ventilatory response in 7 d.p.f. larvae. This study shows that NEC innervation in the gill filaments may account for the development of a functional O(2)-sensing pathway and the hyperventilatory response to hypoxia in zebrafish larvae. At earlier stages, however, O(2)-sensing must occur through another pathway. The possibility that a new type of 5-HT-positive NEC of the gill arches may account for this earlier hypoxic response is discussed.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".