Interspecific variation in brain mitochondrial complex I and II capacity and ROS emission in marine sculpins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental hypoxia presents a metabolic challenge for animals because it inhibits mitochondrial respiration and can lead to the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). We investigated the interplay between O2 use for aerobic respiration and ROS generation among sculpin fishes (Cottidae, Actinopterygii) that are known to vary in whole-animal hypoxia tolerance. We hypothesized that mitochondria from hypoxia tolerant sculpins would show more efficient O2 use with a higher phosphorylation efficiency and lower ROS emission. We showed that brain mitochondria from more hypoxia tolerant sculpins had lower complex I and higher complex II flux capacities compared with less hypoxia tolerant sculpins, but these differences were not related to variation in phosphorylation efficiency (ADP/O) or mitochondrial coupling (respiratory control ratio). The hypoxia tolerant sculpin had higher mitochondrial H2O2 emission per O2 consumed (H2O2/O2) under oligomycin-induced state 4 conditions compared to less hypoxia tolerant sculpin. An in vitro redox challenge experiment revealed species differences in how well mitochondria defend their glutathione redox status when challenged with high levels of reduced glutathione, but the redox challenge elicited the same H2O2/O2 in all species. Furthermore, in vitro anoxia-recovery lowered absolute H2O2 emission (H2O2/mg mitochondrial protein) in all species and negatively impacted state 3 respiration rates in some species, but the responses were not related to hypoxia tolerance. Overall, we clearly demonstrate a relationship between hypoxia tolerance and complex I and II flux capacities in sculpins, but the differences in complex flux capacity do not appear to be directly related to variation in ROS metabolism.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".