Scaling of morphology and ultrastructure of hearts among wild African antelope
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hearts of smaller mammals tend to operate at higher mass-specific mechanical work rates than those of larger mammals. The ultrastructural characteristics of the heart that allow for such variation in work rate still is largely unknown. We have used perfusion-fixation, transmission electron microscopy and stereology to assess the morphology and anatomical aerobic power density of the heart as a function of body mass across six species of wild African antelope differing by approximately 20-fold in body mass. The survival of wild antelope, as prey animals, depends on competent cardiovascular performance. We found that relative heart mass (g kg−1 body mass) decreases with body mass according to a power equation with an exponent of –0.12±0.07 (± 95% CI) (P=0.0027). Likewise, capillary length density (km cm−3 of cardiomyocyte), mitochondrial volume density (fraction of cardiomyocyte), and mitochondrial inner membrane surface density (m2 cm−3 of mitochondria) also decrease with body mass with exponents of –0.17±0.16 (P=0.039), –0.06±0.05 (P=0.018), and –0.07±0.05 (P=0.015), respectively, trends likely to be associated with the greater mass-specific mechanical work rates of the hearts in smaller antelope. Finally, we found proportionality between quantitative characteristics of a structure responsible for the delivery of oxygen (total capillary length) and those of a structure that ultimately uses that oxygen (total mitochondrial inner membrane surface area), which provides support for the economic principle of symmorphosis at the cellular level of the oxygen cascade in an aerobic organ.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".