Acute and chronic cold exposure differentially affect cardiac control, but not cardiorespiratory function, in resting Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No studies have examined the effects of cold temperatures (∼0–1 °C) on in vivo cardiac function and control, and metabolism, in salmonids. Thus, we examined: 1) how acclimation to 8 °C vs. acclimation (>3 weeks) or acute exposure (8-1 °C at 1 °C h−1) to 1 °C influenced cardiorespiratory parameters in resting Atlantic salmon; and 2) if/how the control of cardiac function was affected. Oxygen consumption (M˙O2) and cardiac function [i.e., heart rate (fH) and cardiac output (Q˙)] were 50% lower in the acutely cooled and 1oC-acclimated salmon as compared to 8 °C fish, whereas stroke volume (VS) was unchanged. Intrinsic fH was not affected by whether the fish were acutely exposed or acclimated to 1 °C (values ∼51, 24 and 21 beats min−1 in 8 and 1 °C-acclimated fish, and 8-1 °C fish, respectively), and in all groups fH was primarily under adrenergic control/tone (cholinergic tone 13–18%; adrenergic tone 37–70%). However, β-adrenergic blockade resulted in a 50% increase in VS in the 1oC-acclimated group, and this was surprising as circulating catecholamine levels were ∼1–3 nM in all groups. Overall, the data suggest that this species has a limited capacity to acclimate to temperatures approaching 0 °C. However, we cannot exclude the possibility that cardiac and metabolic responses are evoked when salmon are cooled to ∼ 0–1 °C, and that this prevented further declines in these parameters (i.e., they ‘reset’ quickly). Our data also provide further evidence that VS is temperature insensitive, and strongly suggest that changes in adrenoreceptor mediated control of venous pressure/capacitance occur when salmon are acclimated to 1 °C.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".