Energy expenditure during hatching in rainbow trout (<i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i>) embryos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of our study was to estimate the overall (aerobic and anaerobic) energy expenditure involved in hatching in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) embryos. During hatching, there were significant increases (50% and 19%, respectively) in movement and oxygen consumption. There were no differences in tissue indicators of anaerobic metabolism (adenosine triphosphate (ATP), adenosine monophosphate (AMP) deaminase, ammonia) between embryos that hatched naturally (chorionated) compared with embryos in which the chorion had been manually removed and therefore did not hatch (dechorionated). Furthermore, phosphocreatine (PCr), ATP, and lactate were unaltered immediately after hatching compared with embryos at rest before hatch. The anaerobic capacity of just hatched larvae was further evaluated by forced exercise and hypoxic exposure. PCr and ATP were unaltered following a 2 min manual chase, whereas lactate concentration was significantly increased (30%). Hypoxia (5 mg O2·L1, 5 days) resulted in a 2.7-fold elevation of tissue lactate concentration. Our results reveal that the increase in activity during hatch may be involved in escaping the egg capsule, but the metabolic cost of this increased movement is relatively small. Moreover, the anaerobic capacity of newly hatched rainbow trout is low relative to juvenile or adult fish.
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".