MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4313880463 · doi:10.1101/2023.01.09.523310

Endotherms trade body temperature regulation for the stress response

2023· preprint· en· W4313880463 on OpenAlexaff
Joshua K. R. Tabh, Mariah Hartjes, Gary Burness

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermoregulationEndothermHeat stressEnergy balanceCoping (psychology)BiologyEnergy expenditureEcologyZoologyPsychologyThermodynamicsPhysicsAnimal science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Responding to perceived threats is energetically expensive and can require animals to curtail somatic repair, immunity, and even reproduction to balance energy ledgers. Among birds and mammals, energetic demands of thermoregulation are often immense, yet whether homeostatic body temperatures are also compromised to aid the stress response is unknown. Using data sourced from over 60 years of literature and 24 endotherm species, we show that exposure to non-thermal challenges (e.g. human interaction, social threats) caused body temperatures to decrease in the cold and increase in the warmth, but particularly when species-specific costs of thermoregulation were high and surplus energy low. Biophysical models revealed that allowing body temperature to change in this way liberated up to 24% (mean = 5%) of resting energy expenditure for use toward coping. While useful to avoid energetic overload, such responses nevertheless heighten risks of cold- or heat-induced damage, particularly when coincident with cold- or heat-waves.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction→French-language works237,207→