MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4318619329 · doi:10.1242/jeb.244993

When gills became gills

2023· article· en· W4318619329 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrew Saintsing

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGillBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gills are often thought of as a fish's lungs. They pump oxygen in and carbon dioxide out. But that's not all gills do. They also balance out a fish's electrolytes – the ions that we lose when we sweat. The gills of modern fish evolved from structures that their ancestors – small, worm-like animals – used to pull little specks of food from the ocean. It's not entirely clear when that change occurred, but it's believed to have happened no earlier than when the first fish appeared. Michael Sackville and Colin Brauner from the University of British Columbia, Canada, teamed up with colleagues from the University of Montreal, Canada, and the University of Cambridge, UK, to test this. They looked at the gills of Pacific lamprey (Entosphenus tridentatus) larvae, Florida lancelets (Branchiostoma floridae) and acorn worms (Saccoglossus kowalevskii) to figure out when fish gills took on their modern role.The team selected these animals because lampreys are an ancient group of fish and, although the gills of adults behave like other fish gills, their larvae use gills for eating. In contrast, lancelets and acorn worms aren't fish. They look more like how we picture the ancestors of fish; even the adults use their gills for eating. But just because they use their gills to eat doesn't mean they can't also use their gills to breathe and restore electrolytes. If this is the case for all three species, Sackville and the rest of the team reasoned, then gills started to take on the characteristics of modern fish gills before a modern fish ever existed. If, on the other hand, only the gills of lamprey larvae breathe and restore electrolytes, then these functions of the modern fish gills would be entirely a modern fish adaptation.The researchers started by looking at the lamprey larvae, which they placed in divided chambers such that each half of the chamber contained one half of the lamprey. They measured how much oxygen and electrolytes each lamprey half took in and how much carbon dioxide each half released. Because the gills are located near the head, the scientists were able to compare what happened in each chamber and determine whether more movement occurred in the half with the gills. They found that gills always played an important role in balancing electrolytes, but only really started to play a big role in breathing as the larvae got bigger.Studying the function of gills in lancelets and acorn worms was a bigger challenge, so the researchers had to get creative. The acorn worms were too fragile for the team to put them in the divided chamber, so instead they cut the acorn worms inhalf to determine whether the half with gills played a larger role in breathing. However, it was impossible to divide the lancelet in such a way that they could isolate the role of the gills. It was also impossible to measure the amount of electrolytes that lancelets and acorn worms took in or released, because the animals live in such salty water that measuring small changes in the electrolytes leaving and entering their bodies was impossible. Instead, the scientists looked for cells in the gills with the same features that fish cells use to move electrolytes across the skin and other body surfaces. They found those features in the gills of both lancelets and acorn worms, even though the acorn worms didn't use their gills to breathe.Based on these observations, the team offer an exciting conclusion. While breathing through the gills seems to be a large fish adaptation, balancing the electrolytes in the body may have been an older trick of the gills.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0560.024

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental Biology→Same topicIchthyology and Marine Biology→French-language works237,207→