Goldfish Response to Chronic Hypoxia: Mitochondrial Respiration, Fuel Preference and Energy Metabolism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hypometabolism is a hallmark strategy of hypoxia tolerance. To identify potential mechanisms of metabolic suppression, we have used the goldfish to quantify the effects of chronically low oxygen (4 weeks; 10% air saturation) on mitochondrial respiration capacity and fuel preference. The responses of key enzymes from glycolysis, β-oxidation and the tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle, and Na+/K+-ATPase were also monitored in various tissues of this champion of hypoxia tolerance. Results show that mitochondrial respiration of individual tissues depends on oxygen availability as well as metabolic fuel oxidized. All the respiration parameters measured in this study (LEAK, OXPHOS, Respiratory Control Ratio, CCCP-uncoupled, and COX) are affected by hypoxia, at least for one of the metabolic fuels. However, no common pattern of changes in respiration states is observed across tissues, except for the general downregulation of COX that may help metabolic suppression. Hypoxia causes the brain to switch from carbohydrates to lipids, with no clear fuel preference in other tissues. It also downregulates brain Na+/K+-ATPase (40%) and causes widespread tissue-specific effects on glycolysis and beta-oxidation. This study shows that hypoxia-acclimated goldfish mainly promote metabolic suppression by adjusting the glycolytic supply of pyruvate, reducing brain Na+/K+-ATPase, and downregulating COX, most likely decreasing mitochondrial density.
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 | 0.000 | 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".