MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2543102973 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0164938

Metabolic Cost of the Activation of Immune Response in the Fish-Eating Myotis (Myotis vivesi): The Effects of Inflammation and the Acute Phase Response

2016· article· en· W2543102973 on OpenAlexafffund
Aída Otálora‐Ardila, L. Gerardo Herrera M., José Juan Flores‐Martínez, Kenneth C. Welch

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersDirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInflammationLipopolysaccharidePhytohaemagglutininImmune systemAcute-phase proteinBiologyImmunologyBasal metabolic rateFish <Actinopterygii>PhysiologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inflammation and activation of the acute phase response (APR) are energetically demanding processes that protect against pathogens. Phytohaemagglutinin (PHA) and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) are antigens commonly used to stimulate inflammation and the APR, respectively. We tested the hypothesis that the APR after an LPS challenge was energetically more costly than the inflammatory response after a PHA challenge in the fish-eating Myotis bat (Myotis vivesi). We measured resting metabolic rate (RMR) after bats were administered PHA and LPS. We also measured skin temperature (Tskin) after the LPS challenge and skin swelling after the PHA challenge. Injection of PHA elicited swelling that lasted for several days but changes in RMR and body mass were not significant. LPS injection produced a significant increase in Tskin and in RMR, and significant body mass loss. RMR after LPS injection increased by 140-185% and the total cost of the response was 6.50 kJ. Inflammation was an energetically low-cost process but the APR entailed a significant energetic investment. Examination of APR in other bats suggests that the way in which bats deal with infections might not be uniform.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations44
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207