MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316972995 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2012-0376

Suspended sediment pulse effects in rainbow trout (<i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i>) — relating apical and systemic responses

2013· article· en· W2316972995 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Christian Michel, Heike Schmidt‐Posthaus, Patricia Burkhardt‐Holm

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersJohn Simon Guggenheim Memorial FoundationSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsRainbow troutSpleenBiologyEndocrinologyGillSomatic cellInternal medicineTroutOsmoregulationOncorhynchusJuvenileAnimal scienceFisheryEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>ImmunologyBiochemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To provide an integrated perspective on mineral particle effects in salmonids, juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) were exposed to daily mica particle pulses for 8 and 24 days. On day 8, increased immature erythrocyte proportions indicated a previous stress response. This response was absent on day 24, on which condition factor as well as plasma protein and aspartate aminotransferase activity decreased. The latter two related negatively to the hepato-somatic index, suggesting metabolic adaptations. The hepato-somatic index increased on days 8 and 24, while spleen-somatic index increased on day 24. No histopathological damage occurred in gills, liver, spleen, or kidney. However, splenic melano-macrophages increased on both days, and hyaline degenerations of kidney tubular cells were apparent on day 24. Overall, particle pulses affected rainbow trout more via turbidity rather than by physical damage. We conclude that (i) rainbow trout may adapt to sediment pulses as early as 8 days of exposure and (ii) particle pulses over 24 days can cause structural and metabolic changes in rainbow trout, even when gill damage is absent and apical effects on condition are moderate.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations23
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicAquaculture Nutrition and GrowthFrench-language works237,207