Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reason for the large interspecies variation in vertebrate red blood cell (RBC) size is poorly understood. To test the effect of RBC size on blood viscosity, blood samples from two vertebrates, the dog (Canis familiaris L., 1758) and the greater siren (Siren lacertina L., 1766), with extremely different RBC sizes were examined. In this study, we examined whether RBC size altered the relationship of viscosity and viscometer tube diameter, the well-known Fåhraeus–Lindqvist effect (FLE). We used a glass capillary viscometer that incorporates tubes with a diameter narrow enough to evoke the FLE. At similar RBC concentrations, viscosity of suspensions with the larger siren RBCs were greater than the viscosity of suspensions with the smaller dog RBCs. However, the relationship between viscosity and tube diameter is independent of RBC size. The results of this study allow us to conclude that the FLE is not related to RBC size. While packaging hemoglobin in RBCs appears adaptive by reducing blood viscosity through the FLE, RBC size does not contribute to the reductions in tube-relative viscosity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".