Impacts of environmental matching on the routine metabolic rate and mass of native and mixed-ancestry brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) fry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The environment an organism experiences during early development can impact its physiology and survival later in life. The objective of this study was to determine if temperatures experienced at embryonic life stages of brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) affected mass and routine metabolic rate (RMR) of a subsequent life stage (free-swimming fry). As part of this, we assessed the contributions and importance of hierarchical levels of biological organization [ancestral type (native vs. hatchery-introgressed), population, and family] to variability in mass and RMR of fry. As embryos and alevin, individuals were reared at either natural environmental (5°C) or elevated (9°C) temperatures and then acclimated to either matched or mismatched temperature treatments once yolk sacs were resorbed. Mass differences among fry were strongly influenced by population of origin as well as initial rearing and final acclimation temperatures. Variation in mass-adjusted RMR of fry was also strongly accounted for by source population, acclimation temperature, and individual mass. A significant interaction between population RMR and final acclimation temperature indicated that not all brook trout populations responded the same way to temperature changes. In contrast to expectations, the highest ancestry category (native vs. introgressed) did not significantly influence mass or mass-adjusted RMR.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".