The utility and determination of <i>P</i>crit in fishes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The critical O2 tension (Pcrit) is the lowest PO2 at which an animal can maintain some benchmark rate of O2 uptake (ṀO2). This PO2 has long served as a comparator of hypoxia tolerance in fishes and aquatic invertebrates, but its usefulness in this role, particularly when applied to fishes, has recently been questioned. We believe that Pcrit remains a useful comparator of hypoxia tolerance provided it is determined using the proper methods and hypoxia tolerance is clearly defined. Here, we review the available methods for each of the three steps of Pcrit determination: (1) measuring the most appropriate benchmark ṀO2 state for Pcrit determination (ṀO2,std, the ṀO2 required to support standard metabolic rate); (2) reducing water PO2; and (3) calculating Pcrit from the ṀO2 versus PO2 curve. We make suggestions on best practices for each step and for how to report Pcrit results to maximize their comparative value. We also discuss the concept of hypoxia tolerance and how Pcrit relates to a fish's overall hypoxia tolerance. When appropriate methods are used, Pcrit provides useful comparative physiological and ecological information about the aerobic contributions to a fish's hypoxic survival. When paired with other hypoxia-related physiological measurements (e.g. lactate accumulation, calorimetry-based measurements of metabolic depression, loss-of-equilibrium experiments), Pcrit contributes to a comprehensive understanding of how a fish combines aerobic metabolism, anaerobic metabolism and metabolic depression in an overall strategy for hypoxia tolerance.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".