Acclimation to warm temperatures has important implications for mitochondrial function in Atlantic salmon (<i>Salmo salar</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In fishes, the capacity of thermal acclimation to preserve cardiac mitochondrial function under future warming scenarios is important to understand given the central role that cardiac energy metabolism and performance play in this taxa's thermal tolerance. We acclimated Atlantic salmon to 12 and 20°C (for>2 months), and investigated the effects of acute and chronic warming on cardiac mitochondrial respiration and ROS production (release rate) using high-resolution fluorespirometry. Further, we compared the sensitivity of mitochondrial respiration to nitric oxide (i.e., the NO IC50), and assessed the mitochondrial response to anoxia-reoxygenation (AR). Acute exposure to 20°C increased maximal mitochondrial respiration by ∼55%, however, the mitochondria's complex I-respiratory control ratio was 17% lower and ROS production was increased by≥60%. Acclimation to 20°C: i) preserved mitochondrial coupling and aerobic capacity; ii) decreased the mitochondria's ROS production by ∼30%; iii) increased the mitochondria's NO IC50 by ∼23%; iv) and improved mitochondrial membrane integrity at 20°C. AR did not affect mitochondrial function at 12°C, but acute exposure to 20°C and AR depressed maximal mitochondrial respiration (by ∼9%) and coupling (by ∼16%) without impacting ROS production. Finally, warm acclimation did not improve the capacity of mitochondria to recover from AR, indicating that there was no ‘cross tolerance’ between these challenges. Our findings provide compelling evidence that thermal plasticity of cardiac mitochondrial function contributes to the Atlantic salmon's capability to survive at≥20°C for prolonged periods, but question whether this plasticity may allow them to withstand high temperatures when combined with other stressors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".