Temporal responses in energy expenditure and respiratory quotient following feeding in the muskox: influence of season on energy costs of eating and standing and an endogenous heat increment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seasonal energy metabolism was investigated in young (2- to 3-year-old) muskoxen (Ovibos moschatus) during the winters of 1994 (JanuaryApril) and 1996 (January) and summer of 1995 (July and August). Energy expenditure (EE) increased 35%42% following a meal of chopped brome hay (Bromus inermis) and declined as a double-exponential process over 8 h. The mean energy cost of eating (321 and 361 J·g dry matter1) was lower in winter than in summer, and declined with body mass (BM) (r2 = 0.58). The mean energy cost of standing was 21% (SE = 2.7%) higher than that of bedding. Prefeeding energy expenditure (EEp) was 26% higher in summer than in winter. An endo genous heat increment, measured as EEp EE, at 7-8 h post feeding was lower (P < 0.001) in winter than in summer (39 and 58 kJ·kg BM0.75·d1, respectively). Mean cumulative EE (minus activity costs) for 8 h post feeding was 124 (SE = 4) and 148 (SE = 4) kJ·kg BM0.75 (P < 0.001) in winter and summer, respectively. Respiratory quotients (RQs) >1 were recorded during feeding in winter and a mean RQ of 0.9 was recorded in summer. Seasonal EEp, postfeeding EE, and RQ are consistent with a low cost of maintenance metabolism in winter and an increased requirement for productivity in summer.
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".