Breathing versus feeding in the Pacific hagfish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hagfish represent the oldest extant connection to the ancestral vertebrates, but their physiology is not well understood. Using behavioural (video), physiological (respirometry, flow measurements), classical morphological (dissection, silicone injection) and modern imaging approaches (micro-MRI, DICE micro-CT), we examined the interface between feeding and the unique breathing mechanism (nostril opening, high-frequency velum contraction, low-frequency gill pouch contraction and pharyngo-cutaneous duct contraction) in the Pacific hagfish, Eptatretus stoutii. A video tour via micro-MRI is presented through the breathing and feeding passages. We have reconciled an earlier disagreement as to the position of the velum chamber, which powers inhalation through the nostril, placing it downstream of the merging point of the food and water passage, such that the oronasal septum terminates at the anterior end of the velum chamber. When feeding occurs by engulfment of large chunks by the dental plates, food movement through the chamber may transiently interfere with breathing. Swallowing is accelerated by peristaltic body undulation involving the ventral musculature, and is complete within 5 s. After a large meal (anchovy, 20% body mass), hagfish remain motionless, defaecating bones and scales at 1.7 days and an intestinal peritrophic membrane at 5 days. O2 consumption rate approximately doubles within 1 h of feeding, remaining elevated for 12-24 h. This is achieved by combinations of elevated O2 utilization and ventilatory flow, the latter caused by varying increases in velar contraction frequency and stroke volume. Additional imaging casts light on the reasons for the trend for greater O2 utilization by more posterior pouches and the pharyngo-cutaneous duct in fasted hagfish.
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".