MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085836068 · doi:10.1242/jeb.033720

Heart rate as a predictor of energy expenditure in undisturbed fasting and incubating penguins

2009· article· en· W2085836068 on OpenAlexaff
R. Groscolas, Vanessa M. Viera, N. Guérin, Yves Handrich, Steeve D. Côté

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCenter for Northern Studies
FundersInstitut Polaire Français Paul Emile Victor
KeywordsCaptivityEnergy expenditureAnimal scienceHeart rateInternal medicineBiologyEndocrinologyEcologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heart rate (f(H)) measurement offers the possibility to monitor energy expenditure (EE) in wild animals if the EE/f(H) relationship for the species, physiological stages and activities of interest is known. This relationship has been extensively studied using oxygen consumption rate ( ) measurement in captive, repeatedly handled king penguins (Aptenodytes patagonicus). Unfortunately, the potential effects of stress on the observed relationships resulting from handling and confinement were not considered. This study is the first involving undisturbed animals, and determines the EE/f(H) relationship in naturally fasting and freely incubating or captivity-acclimatized male and female king penguins. EE determination was based on (1) the measurement of body mass loss during periods of phase II fasting, and (2) the calculation of its energy equivalent from changes in body composition, i.e. 23.9 kJ g(-1). f(H) levels in freely incubating and captivity-acclimatized birds were found to be 50-70% lower than those previously reported for resting king penguins during measurements. Significant EE/f(H) relationships were found in freely incubating and captive males and females (R(2)=0.59 to 0.84), with no difference observed between genders. The best overall relationship was obtained by including fasting duration (t, days) in the model: EE=818+43.7xf(H)+36.3t-1.4txf(H) (R(2)=0.91). This equation yielded EE estimates approximately 26% higher than the previously reported 'best' predictive equation in king penguins, and even more so when f(H) was low. This result suggests that stress induces a disproportionate increase of f(H) vs O(2) consumption, and that the use of EE/f(H) relationships obtained in stressed birds could lead to underestimated EE values.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations43
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BiologySame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207