MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evolved Mechanisms of Aerobic Performance and Hypoxia Resistance in High-Altitude Natives

2018· review· en· W2894487059 on OpenAlexaff
Grant B. McClelland, Graham R. Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Physiology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHigh Altitude and Hypoxia
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEffects of high altitude on humansHypoxia (environmental)BiologyOxidative phosphorylationAcclimatizationEcologyChemistryBiochemistryOxygenAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comparative physiology studies of high-altitude species provide an exceptional opportunity to understand naturally evolved mechanisms of hypoxia resistance. Aerobic capacity (VO2max) is a critical performance trait under positive selection in some high-altitude taxa, and several high-altitude natives have evolved to resist the depressive effects of hypoxia on VO2max. This is associated with enhanced flux capacity through the O2 transport cascade and attenuation of the maladaptive responses to chronic hypoxia that can impair O2 transport. Some highlanders exhibit elevated rates of carbohydrate oxidation during exercise, taking advantage of its high ATP yield per mole of O2. Certain highland native animals have also evolved more oxidative muscles and can sustain high rates of lipid oxidation to support thermogenesis. The underlying mechanisms include regulatory adjustments of metabolic pathways and to gene expression networks. Therefore, the evolution of hypoxia resistance in high-altitude natives involves integrated functional changes in the pathways for O2 and substrate delivery and utilization by 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 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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations116
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of PhysiologySame topicHigh Altitude and HypoxiaFrench-language works237,207