Partitioning the metabolic scope: the importance of anaerobic metabolism and implications for the oxygen- and capacity-limited thermal tolerance (OCLTT) hypothesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ongoing climate change is predicted to affect the distribution and abundance of aquatic ectotherms owing to increasing constraints on organismal physiology, in particular involving the metabolic scope (MS) available for performance and fitness. The oxygen- and capacity-limited thermal tolerance (OCLTT) hypothesis prescribes MS as an overarching benchmark for fitness-related performance and assumes that any anaerobic contribution within the MS is insignificant. The MS is typically derived from respirometry by subtracting standard metabolic rate from the maximal metabolic rate; however, the methodology rarely accounts for anaerobic metabolism within the MS. Using gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata) and Trinidadian guppy (Poecilia reticulata), this study tested for trade-offs (i) between aerobic and anaerobic components of locomotor performance; and (ii) between the corresponding components of the MS. Data collection involved measuring oxygen consumption rate at increasing swimming speeds, using the gait transition from steady to unsteady (burst-assisted) swimming to detect the onset of anaerobic metabolism. Results provided evidence of the locomotor performance trade-off, but only in S. aurata. In contrast, both species revealed significant negative correlations between aerobic and anaerobic components of the MS, indicating a trade-off where both components of the MS cannot be optimized simultaneously. Importantly, the fraction of the MS influenced by anaerobic metabolism was on average 24.3 and 26.1% in S. aurata and P. reticulata, respectively. These data highlight the importance of taking anaerobic metabolism into account when assessing effects of environmental variation on the MS, because the fraction where anaerobic metabolism occurs is a poor indicator of sustainable aerobic performance. Our results suggest that without accounting for anaerobic metabolism within the MS, studies involving the OCLTT hypothesis could overestimate the metabolic scope available for sustainable activities and the ability of individuals and species to cope with climate change.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".