Comparison of Mitochondrial Reactive Oxygen Species Production of Ectothermic and Endothermic Fish Muscle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently we demonstrated that the capacity of isolated muscle mitochondria to produce reactive oxygen species, measured as H2O2 efflux, is temperature-sensitive in isolated muscle mitochondria of ectothermic fish and the rat, a representative endothermic mammal. However, at physiological temperatures (15C and 37C for the fish and rat respectively), the fraction of total mitochondrial electron flux that generated H2O2, the fractional electron leak (FEL), was far lower in the rat than in fish. Those results suggested that the elevated body temperatures associated with endothermy may lead to a compensatory decrease in mitochondrial ROS production relative to respiratory capacity. To test this hypothesis we compare slow twitch (red) muscle mitochondria from the endothermic Pacific bluefin tuna (Thunnus orientalis) with mitochondria from three ectothermic fishes (rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), common carp (Cyprinus carpio) and the lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens)) and the rat. At a common assay temperature (25C) rates of mitochondrial respiration and H2O2 efflux were similar in tuna and the other fishes. The thermal sensitivity of fish mitochondria was similar irrespective of ectothermy or endothermy. Comparing tuna to the rat at a common temperature, respiration rates were similar, or lower depending on mitochondrial substrates. FEL was not different across fish species at a common assay temperature (25C) but was markedly higher in fishes than in rat. Overall, endothermy and warming of Pacific Bluefin tuna red muscle may increase the potential for ROS production by muscle mitochondria but the evolution of endothermy in this species is not necessarily associated with a compensatory reduction of ROS production relative to the respiratory capacity of mitochondria.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".