Does condition of Atlantic cod (<i>Gadus morhua</i>) have a greater impact upon swimming performance at<i>U</i>crit or sprint speeds?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To compare the sensitivity of sprint and critical (Ucrit) swimming speeds to the condition of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) and to identify the best anatomic, behavioural and biochemical correlates of these types of swimming, we established two groups of cod that were fed or starved for 12 weeks. We evaluated sprint swimming and Ucrit performance as well as the speed at which repeated burst-coast movements began in the Ucrit test before measuring the metabolic capacities of red and white muscle sampled caudally, centrally and rostrally and the anatomic characteristics of the cod. White muscle lactate was measured directly after the Ucrit test. As expected, the twofold difference in Fulton's condition factor (0.5+/-0.04 for starved and 1.0+/-0.1 for fed cod) was accompanied by large differences in the anatomic and biochemical parameters measured. Despite the relative sparing of muscle aerobic capacity during starvation and despite the greater use of oxidative fibres during Ucrit compared with sprint swimming, these types of swimming differed by much the same extent between starved and fed cod. In the Ucrit tests, white muscle lactate levels and lactate accumulation per burst-coast movement were considerably higher in fed than starved cod, suggesting more intensive use of fast muscle fibres in cod in good condition. Multiple regression analysis indicated strong correlations between Ucrit, the speed at which regular burst-coasting began and the activity of pyruvate dehydrogenase (PDH) in red muscle (both caudal and central positions). PDH activity may limit the rate of oxidative ATP production by red muscle. The activity of cytochrome c oxidase in rostral white muscle was the strongest correlate of sprint swimming, suggesting that aerobic preparation of white muscle facilitates rapid contraction. The correlation between Ucrit and sprint swimming was weak, perhaps due to inter-individual differences in sensitivity during sprint tests.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".