Body temperature depression and peripheral heat loss accompany the metabolic and ventilatory responses to hypoxia in low and high altitude birds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to compare the thermoregulatory, metabolic and ventilatory responses to hypoxia of the high altitude bar-headed goose with low altitude waterfowl. All birds were found to reduce body temperature (T(b)) during hypoxia, by up to 1-1.5 degrees C in severe hypoxia. During prolonged hypoxia, T(b) stabilized at a new lower temperature. A regulated increase in heat loss contributed to T(b) depression as reflected by increases in bill surface temperatures (up to 5 degrees C) during hypoxia. Bill warming required peripheral chemoreceptor inputs, since vagotomy abolished this response to hypoxia. T(b) depression could still occur without bill warming, however, because vagotomized birds reduced T(b) as much as intact birds. Compared to both greylag geese and pekin ducks, bar-headed geese required more severe hypoxia to initiate T(b) depression and heat loss from the bill. However, when T(b) depression or bill warming were expressed relative to arterial O(2) concentration (rather than inspired O(2)) all species were similar; this suggests that enhanced O(2) loading, rather than differences in thermoregulatory control centres, reduces T(b) depression during hypoxia in bar-headed geese. Correspondingly, bar-headed geese maintained higher rates of metabolism during severe hypoxia (7% inspired O(2)), but this was only partly due to differences in T(b). Time domains of the hypoxic ventilatory response also appeared to differ between bar-headed geese and low altitude species. Overall, our results suggest that birds can adjust peripheral heat dissipation to facilitate T(b) depression during hypoxia, and that bar-headed geese minimize T(b) and metabolic depression as a result of evolutionary adaptations that enhance O(2) transport.
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".