MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164202123 · doi:10.1242/jeb.031252

In pursuit of Irving and Scholander: a review of oxygen store management in seals and penguins

2011· review· en· W2164202123 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and Diving-Related Complications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForagingBiologyEcologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the introduction of the aerobic dive limit (ADL) 30 years ago, the concept that most dives of marine mammals and sea birds are aerobic in nature has dominated the interpretation of their diving behavior and foraging ecology. Although there have been many measurements of body oxygen stores, there have been few investigations of the actual depletion of those stores during dives. Yet, it is the pattern, rate and magnitude of depletion of O(2) stores that underlie the ADL. Therefore, in order to assess strategies of O(2) store management, we review (a) the magnitude of O(2) stores, (b) past studies of O(2) store depletion and (c) our recent investigations of O(2) store utilization during sleep apnea and dives of elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris) and during dives of emperor penguins (Aptenodytes forsteri). We conclude with the implications of these findings for (a) the physiological responses underlying O(2) store utilization, (b) the physiological basis of the ADL and (c) the value of extreme hypoxemic tolerance and the significance of the avoidance of re-perfusion injury in these animals.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.329 · 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