How Do Marine Mammals Manage and Usually Avoid Gas Emboli Formation and Gas Embolic Pathology? Critical Clues From Studies of Wild Dolphins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Decompression theory has been mainly based on studies on terrestrial mammals, and may not translate well to marine mammals. However, evidence that marine mammals experience gas bubbles during diving is growing, causing concern that these bubbles may cause gas emboli pathology (GEP) under unusual circumstances. Marine mammal management, and usual avoidance, of gas emboli and GEP, or the bends, became a topic of intense scientific interest after sonar-exposed, mass-stranded deep-diving whales were observed with gas bubbles. Theoretical models, based on our current understanding of diving physiology in cetaceans, predict that the tissue and blood N 2 levels in the bottlenose dolphin ( Tursiops truncatus ) are at levels that would result in severe DCS symptoms in similar sized terrestrial mammals. However, the dolphins appear to have physiological or behavioral mechanisms to avoid excessive blood N 2 levels, or may be more resistant to circulating bubbles through immunological/biochemical adaptations. Studies on behavior, anatomy and physiology of marine mammals have enhanced our understanding of the mechanisms that are thought to prevent excessive uptake of N 2 . This has led to the selective gas exchange hypothesis, which provides a mechanism how stress-induced behavioral change may cause failure of the normal physiology, which results in excessive uptake of N 2 , and in extreme cases may cause formation of symptomatic gas emboli. Studies on cardiorespiratory function have been integral to the development of this hypothesis, with work initially being conducted on excised tissues and cadavers, followed by studies on anesthetized animals or trained animals under human care. These studies enabled research on free-ranging common bottlenose dolphins in Sarasota Bay, FL, and off Bermuda, and have included work on the metabolic and cardiorespiratory physiology of both shallow- and deep-diving dolphins and have been integral to better understand how cetaceans can dive to extreme depths, for long durations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".