Cardiac plasticity in fishes: environmental influences and intraspecific differences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fish cardiac physiology and anatomy show a multiplicity of intraspecific modifications when exposed to prolonged changes in environmentally relevant parameters such as temperature, hypoxia and food availability, and when meeting the increased demands associated with training/increased activity and sexual maturation. Further, there is evidence that rearing fish under intensive aquaculture conditions significantly alters some, but not all, aspects of cardiac anatomy and physiology. This review focuses on the responses of cardiac physiology and anatomy to these challenges, highlighting where applicable, the importance of hyperplastic (i.e. the production of new cells) vs hypertrophic (the enlargement of existing cells) growth to the adaptive response of the heart. In addition, we summarize recent studies that have explored the relationship between the myocardial protection afforded by preconditioning and myocardial hypoxia tolerance. This latter research clearly demonstrates the capacity of the fish heart to adjust to short-term perturbations, and shows that it can be difficult to predict how short-term and long-term alterations in cardiac physiology will interact.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".