Body oxygen stores, aerobic dive limits and diving behaviour of the star-nosed mole (<i>Condylura cristata</i>) and comparisons with non-aquatic talpids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dive performance, oxygen storage capacity and partitioning of body oxygen reserves of one of the world's smallest mammalian divers, the star-nosed mole Condylura cristata, were investigated. On the basis of 722 voluntary dives recorded from 18 captive star-nosed moles, the mean dive duration (9.2+/-0.2 s; mean +/- S.E.M.) and maximum recorded dive time (47 s) of this insectivore were comparable with those of several substantially larger semi-aquatic endotherms. Total body O(2) stores of adult star-nosed moles (34.0 ml kg(-1)) were 16.4 % higher than for similarly sized, strictly fossorial coast moles Scapanus orarius (29.2 ml kg(-1)), with the greatest differences observed in lung and muscle O(2) storage capacity. The mean lung volume of C. cristata (8.09 ml 100 g(-1)) was 1.81 times the predicted allometric value and exceeded that of coast moles by 65.4 % (P=0.0001). The overall mean myoglobin (Mb) concentration of skeletal muscles of adult star-nosed moles (13.57+/-0.40 mg g(-1) wet tissue, N=7) was 19.5 % higher than for coast moles (11.36+/-0.34 mg g(-1) wet tissue, N=10; P=0.0008) and 54.2 % higher than for American shrew-moles Neurotrichus gibbsii (8.8 mg g(-1) wet tissue; N=2). The mean skeletal muscle Mb content of adult star-nosed moles was 91.1 % higher than for juveniles of this species (P<0.0001). On the basis of an average diving metabolic rate of 5.38+/-0.35 ml O(2) g(-1) h(-1) (N=11), the calculated aerobic dive limit (ADL) of star-nosed moles was 22.8 s for adults and 20.7 s for juveniles. Only 2.9 % of voluntary dives by adult and juvenile star-nosed moles exceeded their respective calculated ADLs, suggesting that star-nosed moles rarely exploit anaerobic metabolism while diving, a conclusion supported by the low buffering capacity of their skeletal muscles. We suggest that a high mass-specific O(2) storage capacity and relatively low metabolic cost of submergence are key contributors to the impressive dive performance of these diminutive insectivores.
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".