Osmo-respiratory compromise in the mosshead sculpin (Clinocottus globiceps): effects of temperature, hypoxia, and re-oxygenation on rates of diffusive water flux and oxygen uptake
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In nature, mosshead sculpins (Clinocottus globiceps) are challenged by fluctuations in temperature and oxygen levels in their environment. However, it is unclear how mosshead sculpins modulate the permeability of their branchial epithelia to water and O2 in response to temperature or hypoxia stress. Acute decrease in temperature from 13 to 6 oC reduced diffusive water flux rate by 22% and ṀO2 by 51%, whereas acute increase in temperature from 13 to 25 oC increased diffusive water flux rate by 217% and ṀO2 by 140%, yielding overall Q10 values of 2.08 and 2.47 respectively. Acute reductions in oxygen tension from >95% to 20% or 10% air saturation did not impact diffusive water flux rates, however, ṀO2 was reduced significantly by 36% and 65% respectively. During 1-h or 3-h recovery periods diffusive water flux rates were depressed while ṀO2 exhibited overshoots beyond the normoxic control level. Many responses differed from those seen in our parallel earlier study on the tidepool sculpin, a cottid with similar hypoxia tolerance but much smaller gill area that occupies a similar environment. Overall, our data suggest that during temperature stress, diffusive water flux rates and ṀO2 follow the traditional osmo-respiratory compromise pattern, but during hypoxia and re-oxygenation stress, diffusive water flux rates are decoupled from ṀO2.
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) | 0.001 | 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".