MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038620587 · doi:10.1086/651100

Energetics of Hypoxia in a Mouth‐Brooding Cichlid: Evidence for Interdemic and Developmental Effects

2010· article· en· W2038620587 on OpenAlexaff
Erin E. Reardon, Lauren J. Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological and Biochemical Zoology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Biodiversity
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersRocky Mountain Research Station
KeywordsBiologyCichlidPopulationEnergeticsOffspringZoologyPaternal careBasal metabolic rateEcologyCaptivityHypoxia (environmental)Fish <Actinopterygii>Animal scienceOxygenDemographyEndocrinologyPregnancyFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used a common-garden rearing experiment to explore environmentally induced tolerance to hypoxia in the African mouth-brooding cichlid Pseudocrenilabrus multicolor. F(1) fish originating from three field populations were grown under low or high dissolved oxygen (DO), and their resting routine metabolic rate (RMR), critical oxygen tension (P(crit)), and marginal metabolic scope (MMS) were quantified. In a second rearing experiment, we compared the RMR of brooding and nonbrooding females of low-DO origin grown under low and high DO. Fish reared under low DO had a lower P(crit) than fish reared under high DO. There was also an interaction between treatment and gender; females had a higher P(crit) than males when reared under normoxia. Variation in RMR was driven primarily by population effects, and there was an interaction between treatment and population. Regardless of population or treatment, males had a higher MMS than females. Fish reared under low DO had a higher MMS than fish reared under high DO, except for the high-DO population in which there was no treatment effect. Brooding females had a higher RMR than postbrooding females regardless of the growth treatment, indicating an energetic cost to brooding. The results suggest a strong element of developmental plasticity in P(crit) across populations and both plastic and genetic components of variation in the RMR and MMS. This study also highlights the cost of parental care in mouth-brooding fishes, which may increase the fitness of the offspring at the energetic expense of the parent, a cost that may be elevated under hypoxia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiological and Biochemical ZoologySame topicAquatic Ecosystems and BiodiversityFrench-language works237,207