MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Physiological correlates of seasonal growth patterns in lake trout <i>Salvelinus namaycush</i>

2010· article· en· W2146464129 on OpenAlexaff
Yolanda E. Morbey, Patrice Couture, Patrick Busby, Brian J. Shuter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueMinistry of Natural Resources and ForestryWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalvelinusTroutBiologyForagingEcologyZooplanktonLactate dehydrogenaseFisheryZoologyAnimal scienceFish <Actinopterygii>BiochemistryEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Physiological correlates of seasonal growth patterns were measured in lake trout Salvelinus namaycush from two populations with contrasting diets (zooplankton-dominated diet in Louisa Lake; fish-dominated diet in Opeongo Lake). Fish in Opeongo Lake grew faster and were in better condition than fish in Louisa Lake. The most prominent biochemical difference between populations was higher citrate synthase (CS) and cytochrome c oxidase activity in the white muscle of fish from Opeongo Lake, indicating greater sustained swimming activity in this lake. In contrast, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) activity in white muscle, an indicator of capacity for burst swimming, was similar between lakes. Nucleoside diphosphate kinase (NDPK) activity in white muscle, an indicator of protein synthesis, was higher in Opeongo Lake than in Louisa Lake but only in the autumn. In both lakes, protein concentration and therefore nutritional status increased as the growing season progressed from spring to summer to autumn. Biochemical indicators of growth and activity showed similar seasonal patterns in the two lakes with the spring characterized by high NDPK, high CS and high LDH activities (i.e. high levels of protein synthesis in association with high aerobic and anaerobic activities). These results suggest high foraging effort and allocation to growth early in the growing season in both lakes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicAquaculture Nutrition and GrowthFrench-language works237,207