A three‐phase excess post‐exercise oxygen consumption in Atlantic salmon <i>Salmo salar</i> and its response to exercise training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recovery of oxygen uptake to the standard metabolic rate (SMR) following exhaustive chasing exercise in Atlantic salmon Salmo salar parr occurred in three phases (rapid, plateau and slow). The initial recovery phase lasted 0·7 h and contributed 16% to the total excess post‐exercise oxygen consumption (EPOC). It was followed by a longer plateau phase that contributed 53% to the total EPOC. The slow recovery phase that completed recovery of SMR, which has not been reported previously, made a 31% contribution to the total EPOC. The plasticity of EPOC was demonstrated in exercise‐trained fish. Exercise training increased EPOC by 39% when compared with control fish (mean ± S.E., 877·7 ± 73·1 v . 629·2 ± 53·4 mg O 2 kg −1 , d.f. = 9, P < 0·05), with the duration of the plateau phase increasing by 38% (4·7 ± 0·58 v . 3·4 ± 0·16 h, d.f. = 9, P < 0·05) and the contribution of the slow phase to the total EPOC increasing by 80% (173·9 ± 23·9 v . 312·5 ± 50·4 mg O 2 kg −1 , d.f. = 9, P < 0·05). As a result, the combination of the plateau and slow phases of exercise‐trained fish increased by 47% compared with control fish (756·6 ± 71·4 v . 513·6 ± 43·1 mg O 2 kg −1 ; d.f. = 9, P = 0·01). To substantiate the hypothesis that the plateau and slow recovery phase of EPOC was related to general metabolic recovery following exhaustive exercise, the time‐course for recovery of SMR was compared with previously published metabolite recovery profiles. The final phase of metabolic recovery was temporally associated with the final phases of gluconeogenesis, lactate oxidation and muscle intracellular pH regulation. Therefore, the plasticity of the latter phase of EPOC agreed with the known effects of exercise training in fishes.
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".