The effect of acclimation to hypoxia and sustained exercise on subsequent hypoxia tolerance and swimming performance in goldfish (<i>Carassius auratus</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine whether acclimation to hypoxia and sustained exercise would increase hypoxia tolerance (as indicated by a decrease in critical oxygen tension, P(crit)) and swimming performance in goldfish (Carassius auratus), and to investigate the relationship between changes in performance and gill remodelling and tissue metabolic capacity. Goldfish were acclimated to either hypoxia (48 h at 0.3 mg O(2) l(-1)) or sustained exercise (48 h at 70% of critical swimming speed, U(crit)) and then P(crit) and U(crit) were determined in normoxia (10 mg O(2) l(-1)) and hypoxia (1 mg O(2) l(-1)) and compared with values from control fish. Acclimation to both hypoxia and sustained exercise improved hypoxia tolerance (P(crit) was reduced by 49% and 39%, respectively), which was associated with an increase in lamellar surface area (71% and 43%, respectively) and an increase in blood [Hb] (26% in both groups). Exercise acclimation also resulted in a decrease in routine ( ). Acclimation to both hypoxia and sustained exercise resulted in a significant increase in U(crit) in hypoxia (18% and 17%, respectively), which was associated with an increase in maximal O(2) consumption rate at U(crit) ( ; 35% and 39%, respectively). While hypoxia acclimation resulted in an increase in U(crit) in normoxia, acclimation to sustained exercise did not improve subsequent swimming performance in normoxia. This lack of improvement was possibly due to depleted oxidizable substrates during exercise acclimation.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".