Does hydrostatic pressure influence lumpfish (<i>Cyclopterus lumpus</i>) heart rate and its response to environmental challenges?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Studies on the effects of environmental changes with increasing depth (e.g. temperature and oxygen level) on fish physiology rarely consider how hydrostatic pressure might influence the observed responses. In this study, lumpfish (Cyclopterus lumpus, 200–400 g), which can exhibit vertical migrations of over 100 m daily and can be found at depths of 500 m or more, were implanted with Star-Oddi micro-HRT loggers. Then, their heart rate (fH) was measured in a pressure chamber when exposed to the following: (i) increasing pressure (up to 80 bar; 800 m in depth) at 10°C or (ii) increasing temperature (12–20°C), decreasing temperature (12 to 4°C) or decreasing oxygen levels (101–55% air saturation at 12°C) in the absence or presence of 80 bar of pressure. Additionally, we determined their fH response to chasing and to increasing temperature (to 22°C) at atmospheric pressure. Pressure-induced increases in fH (e.g. from 48 to 61 bpm at 12°C) were associated with hyperactivity. The magnitude of the rise in fH with temperature was greater in pressure-exposed vs. control fish (i.e. by ~30 bpm vs. 45 bpm between 5°C and 20°C). However, the relative increase (i.e. slope of the relationship) was not different between groups. In contrast, 80 bar of pressure eliminated the small (5 bpm) increase in fH when control fish were exposed to hypoxia. Exhaustive exercise and increasing temperature to 22°C resulted in a maximum fH of 77 and 81 bpm, respectively. Our research shows that pressure influences the fH response to environmental challenges and provides the first evidence that lumpfish have a limited capacity to increase fH.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".