Energy utilization and metabolism in spawning migrating Early Stuart sockeye salmon (<i>Oncorhynchus nerka</i>): the migratory paradox
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) were followed during their 1400-km-long migration from cessation of feeding outside British Columbia, Canada, up the Fraser River to spawning. Enzymatic capacity (indicative of glycolysis, β-oxidation, and respiratory chain ATP formation), muscle fibre size distribution, body and muscle conformation, and gross chemical composition in different parts of red and white muscle were monitored to determine energy strategies throughout the migration. The mobilization of extramuscular lipid depots was also monitored. The most conspicuous change in white muscle, concomitant with a large decrease in protein content, was an ordered reduction in muscle fibre size and lipid depots with distance covered, resulting in an accumulation of fibres with a cross section between 2000 and 6000 µm2and a maintained level of 4% intramuscular fat. A peak in oxidative capacity was noted in red muscle during the strenuous passage of Fraser Canyon. In white muscle, glycolytic capacity was maintained at least until passage of the Fraser Canyon. Enzymatic capacity was higher in the caudal than rostral part of the muscle. Differences were also found between lateral and dorsal parts of the white muscle, indicating significant differences in the timing and magnitude of enzymatic capacity of red and white muscle.
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".