Physiological analysis of the lymphatic system in the eastern painted turtle (Chrysemys picta picta)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Examination into the anuran lymphatic system has led to a comprehensive understanding of lymphatics, including the importance of synchrony in fluid-balance maintenance. However, little research has been conducted on the lymphatics of turtles and other reptilian vertebrates. Using pressure-peak recordings created through cannulation of both lymph hearts of the eastern painted turtle, Chrysemys picta picta (Schneider, 1783), the lymph heart contraction rate was verified and the interbeat interval patterns were examined using Poincaré plots. The lymph heart beating rate was determined to be 38.2 beats·min–1with a mean pulse pressure of 2.40 ± 1.44 mm Hg (1 mm Hg at 0 °C = 133.3224 Pa). Poincaré plots are useful in displaying nonlinear sequential data and are often given descriptive names related to the overall pattern. The Poincaré plot resembled a garden hose nozzle spray, indicating a large variability in interbeat time intervals with periods of multiple-beat patterns. The degree of bilateral lymph heart synchrony was determined in the turtle using the mean time difference between right and left lymph heart systoles. Results show that chelonian lymph hearts do in fact beat in synchrony, with over 50% of contractions occurring within 100 ms of each other. This indicates shared neuronal control and may suggest an energetic advantage to fluid homeostasis.
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 | 0.001 | 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".