A comparison of thermal sensitivities of wing muscle contractile properties from a temperate and tropical bat species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Endotherms experience temperature variation among body regions, or regional heterothermy, despite maintaining high core body temperatures. Bat forelimbs are elongated to function as wings, which makes them vulnerable to heat loss and exaggerates regional heterothermy. A tropical bat species, Carollia perspicillata, flies with distal wing muscles that are substantially (>10°C) cooler than proximal wing muscles and significantly less temperature sensitive. We hypothesized that the difference between proximal and distal wing muscles would be even more extreme in a temperate bat species that is capable of flight at variable environmental temperatures. We measured the contractile properties of the proximal pectoralis muscle and distal extensor carpi radialis muscle at a range of temperatures in the big brown bat, Eptesicus fuscus, and compared their thermal dependence with that of the same muscles in C. perspicillata. We found that, overall, temperature sensitivities between species were remarkably similar. The sole exception was the shortening velocity of the pectoralis muscle in E. fuscus, which was less temperature sensitive than in C. perspicillata. This decreased temperature sensitivity in a proximal muscle runs counter to our prediction. We suggest that the relative lability of body temperature in E. fuscus may make better pectoralis function at low temperatures advantageous.
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".