MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162666211 · doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0322

Red muscle function in stiff-bodied swimmers: there and almost back again

2011· review· en· W2162666211 on OpenAlexaff
Douglas A. Syme, Robert E. Shadwick

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyAnatomyLeg muscleFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fishes with internalized and endothermic red muscles (i.e. tunas and lamnid sharks) are known for a stiff-bodied form of undulatory swimming, based on unique muscle-tendon architecture that limits lateral undulation to the tail region even though the red muscle is shifted anteriorly. A strong convergence between lamnid sharks and tunas in these features suggests that thunniform swimming might be evolutionarily tied to this specialization of red muscle, but recent observations on the common thresher shark (Alopias vulpinus) do not support this view. Here, we review the fundamental features of the locomotor systems in lamnids and tunas, and present data on in vivo muscle function and swimming mechanics in thresher sharks. These results suggest that the presence of endothermic and internalized red muscles alone in a fish does not predict or constrain the swimming mode to be thunniform and, indeed, that the benefits of this type of muscle may vary greatly as a consequence of body size.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations31
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicIchthyology and Marine BiologyFrench-language works237,207