Differential effects of chronic hypoxia and feed restriction on the expression of leptin and its receptor, food intake regulation and the endocrine stress response in common carp
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Appetite suppression is a common response to hypoxia in fish that confers significant energy savings. Yet little is known about the endocrine signals involved in the regulation of food intake during chronic hypoxia. Thus, we assessed the impact of chronic hypoxia on food intake, the expression of the potent anorexigenic signal leptin and its receptor (lepr), the mRNA levels of key hypothalamic appetite-regulating genes, and the activity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-interrenal (HPI) axis in common carp, Cyprinus carpio. Fish exposed to 10% O(2) saturation for 8 days were chronically anorexic and consumed on average 79% less food than normoxic controls. Hypoxia also elicited gradual and parallel increases in the expression of liver leptin-a-I, leptin-a-II, lepr and erythropoietin, a known hypoxia-responsive gene. In contrast, the liver mRNA levels of all four genes remained unchanged in normoxic fish pair-fed to the hypoxia treatment. In the hypothalamus, expression of the appetite-regulating genes were consistent with an inhibition and stimulation of hunger in the hypoxic and pair-fed fish, respectively, and reduced feed intake led to a decrease in lepr. Although both treatments elicited similar delayed increases in plasma cortisol, they were characterized by distinct HPI axis effector transcript levels and a marked differential increase in pituitary lepr expression. Together, these results show that a reduction in O(2) availability, and not feed intake, stimulates liver leptin-a expression in common carp and suggest that this pleiotropic cytokine is involved in the regulation of appetite and the endocrine stress response during chronic hypoxia.
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".