Muscle activity and hydrodynamic function of pelvic fins in trout (<i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contrary to the previous premise that pelvic fins lacked obvious function, recent work on three-dimensional fin motions suggests that pelvic fins actively control stability and speed in slowly swimming trout. This study used electromyography to measure pelvic fin muscle activity and particle imaging velocimetry to quantify flow along the ventral body region to test this hypothesis. Fish swam at slow speeds (0.13-1.36 BL s(-1)) while being filmed with three high speed cameras. Three-dimensional kinematics were captured for all trials. During EMG trials pelvic fin muscle activity was synchronized to kinematic motion, during particle imaging velocimetry trials, a laser light-sheet was used to visualize the flow surrounding the ventral aspect of the fish. Four main conclusions are reached: first, pelvic fins are actively oscillated during slow-speed swimming; antagonistic abductor and adductor muscles contracted simultaneously, their collective action producing a unique contralateral oscillating behaviour in the fins. Second, pelvic fins slow the flow along the ventral side affecting pitch and yaw instabilities; flow upstream of the pelvic fins is slowed by 0.02 m s(-1) and flow downstream of the pelvic fins is slowed by 0.034 m s(-1) compared with free stream flow. Third, pelvic fin wake influences anal fin angle of attack; flow angle in the wake of the pelvic fin was 33.84+/-2.4 deg. (max) and -11.83+/-11.2 deg. (min) compared with the free stream flow angle of 1.27+/-0.1 deg. Fourth, pelvic fins appear to actively damp body oscillation during slow-speed swimming, providing drag to help control speed and stabilize the body position during slow-speed swimming.
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".