Bibliographic record
Abstract
When it comes to feats of extreme endurance, bar-headed geese leave most animals in their wake – even other birds. Migrating back and forth across the Himalayan Mountains from their northern nesting grounds to overwinter in South Asia, the large birds have to sustain flight – one of the most metabolically demanding activities – at altitudes where oxygen is scarce. Sabine Lague and colleagues from the University of British Columbia and Queen's University, Canada, explain that most birds are well equipped to deal with the metabolic demands of flight, and bar-headed geese have souped-up systems to ensure that they deliver sufficient oxygen to their toiling flight muscles in the thinnest of air. However, the team explains that most of our understanding of the physiology of these extreme aviators is based on observations of animals raised at sea level; yet, the true athletes are born and raised at altitudes of over 3000 m on the Tibetan and Mongolian plains.Curious to find out how acclimatisation and growing up in a rarefied atmosphere affects the birds’ respiratory and cardiovascular systems, Lague, Beverly Chua, Tony Farrell, Yuxiang Wang and Bill Milsom set up a lab on the shores of the high-altitude Lake Qinghai, China, to find out how the birds’ ventilatory and cardiovascular systems compared with those of bar-headed geese raised back in Vancouver at sea level.The team gently cradled the birds in a sling and placed their heads in a large Plexiglas chamber to measure oxygen consumption. They also recorded the pH, the concentrations of certain ions, and the oxygen content of the blood, in addition to measuring blood pressure and other cardiac variables to monitor how the hearts coped as the oxygen supply was gradually reduced to levels in excess of those experienced during the epic migration. Impressively, Lague and colleagues found that the high-altitude animals had lower metabolic rates than the sea-level birds and the Tibetan geese were able to breathe harder than the Vancouver birds as the oxygen levels plummeted. However, when they scrutinised the oxygen carrying capacity of both groups of birds, the high-altitude birds carried no more oxygen than the birds reared at low altitude. And when the team analysed the function of the birds’ cardiovascular system, they found that their hearts were able to pump blood just as effectively when the oxygen supply was high, but as the oxygen supply was reduced, the hearts of the birds from Lake Qinghai were able to pump blood at twice the rate of those from the geese raised in Canada.‘High-altitude-reared bar-headed geese exhibit a reduced oxygen demand at rest and a modest but significant increase in oxygen uptake and delivery during progressive hypoxia compared to low-altitude-reared bar-headed geese’, say Lague and her colleagues, who are now keen to know more about the mechanisms that allow the Tibetan bar-headed geese to outperform their cousins in British Columbia.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".