Rorqual whale nasal plugs: protecting the respiratory tract against water entry and barotrauma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The upper respiratory tract of rorquals, lunge-feeding baleen whales, must be protected against water incursion and against the risk of barotrauma at depth, where air-filled spaces like the bony nasal cavities may experience high adverse pressure gradients. We hypothesize these two disparate tasks are accomplished by paired cylindrical nasal plugs that attach on the rostrum and deep inside the nasal cavity. Here we present evidence that the large size and deep attachment of the plugs is a compromise allowing them to block the nasal cavities to prevent water entry while also facilitating pressure equilibration between the nasal cavities and ambient hydrostatic pressure (Pamb) at depth. We investigated nasal plug behaviour using videos of rorquals surfacing, plug morphology from dissections, histology, and MRI scans, and plug function by mathematically modelling nasal pressures at depth. We found each nasal plug has three structurally distinct regions: a muscular rostral region, a predominantly fatty mid-section, and an elastic tendon that attaches the plug caudally. We propose muscle contraction while surfacing pulls the fatty sections rostrally, opening the nasal cavities to air, while the elastic tendons snap the plugs back into place sealing the cavities after breathing. At depth, we propose Pamb pushes the fatty region deeper into the nasal cavities, decreasing air volume by about half and equilibrating nasal cavity to Pamb, preventing barotrauma. The nasal plugs are a unique innovation in rorquals that demonstrate their importance and novelty during diving, where pressure becomes as important an issue as the danger of water entry.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".