Oxygen limitation may affect the temperature and size dependence of metabolism in aquatic ectotherms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both oxygen and temperature are fundamental factors determining metabolic performance, fitness, ecological niches, and responses of many aquatic organisms to climate change. Despite the importance of physical and physiological constraints on oxygen supply affecting aerobic metabolism of aquatic ectotherms, ecological theories such as the metabolic theory of ecology have focused on the effects of temperature rather than oxygen. This gap currently impedes mechanistic models from accurately predicting metabolic rates (i.e., oxygen consumption rates) of aquatic organisms and restricts predictions to resting metabolism, which is less affected by oxygen limitation. Here, we expand on models of metabolic scaling by accounting for the role of oxygen availability and temperature on both resting and active metabolic rates. Our model predicts that oxygen limitation is more likely to constrain metabolism in larger, warmer, and active fish. Consequently, active metabolic rates are less responsive to temperature than are resting metabolic rates, and metabolism scales to body size with a smaller exponent whenever temperatures or activity levels are higher. Results from a metaanalysis of fish metabolic rates are consistent with our model predictions. The observed interactive effects of temperature, oxygen availability, and body size predict that global warming will limit the aerobic scope of aquatic ectotherms and may place a greater metabolic burden on larger individuals, impairing their physiological performance in the future. Our model reconciles the metabolic theory with empirical observations of oxygen limitation and provides a formal, quantitative framework for predicting both resting and active metabolic rate and hence aerobic scope of aquatic ectotherms.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".