MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4367841859 · doi:10.1242/jeb.245005

Murray cod waterhole woes

2023· article· en· W4367841859 on OpenAlexaff
Angelina Dichiera

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFish <Actinopterygii>Fish killFisheryFreshwater fishEnvironmental scienceEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During bouts of prolonged drought and little to no river flow, waterholes are a haven for freshwater fishes. However, as humans divert more water for their own use and as global temperatures rise, these small bodies of water are increasingly vulnerable to climbing temperatures and low oxygen levels. Fortunately, some fishes are able to change quickly to cope with high temperatures, and occasionally these changes also help them do better with low oxygen levels. But size matters when it comes to dealing with these stressors. Big fish are thought to deal with low oxygen better than small fish, and small fish are thought to deal better with high temperatures, but all are likely to be vulnerable when both stressful circumstances occur simultaneously. To investigate how body size influences a fish's ability to tolerate both high heat and low oxygen, Darren McPhee, with researchers from the University of Queensland and the Queensland Department of Regional Development, Australia, turned to massive Murray cod – which can grow to the size of a giant panda (over 100 kg) – to find out how they deal with the combined threat.Working with fish ranging from 0.2 g to 3 kg, the team transferred the animals to water at temperatures mimicking a hot summer (28°C). After 4 weeks, all of the cod, regardless of size, increased the temperature at which they lose their balance (known as the upper thermal limit), indicating that the cod are able to deal with persistent high temperatures. But when the team tested the fish's abilities to remain upright at high temperatures as the water oxygen levels decreased, their ability to tolerate heat declined. Surprisingly, the fish's body sizes had an unusual impact on their ability to withstand high temperatures when their oxygen supply was restricted. As expected, when the fish had access to well-oxygenated water (100% and 50% oxygen saturation), the smaller animals coped better with high temperatures than the big fish. But this pattern flipped when the oxygen levels in the water were low (30% and 16% oxygen saturation), where the largest fish tolerated the high temperatures better than the smaller fish. Intriguingly, this didn't mean that the big fish were thermal tolerance champions. At the lowest oxygen level (16% oxygen saturation), the mid-sized fish coped best with the high temperatures.The scientists also tested how short-term and persistent exposure to different temperatures affected the cod's ability to survive low oxygen in several different ways. In the short term (less than 24 h), fish exposed to high temperatures breathed faster and lost their balance at an oxygen level twice as high as what they would normally handle. But when exposed to a high heat for 4 weeks, the responses to low oxygen weren't quite as drastic. Again, the largest cod were the least bothered by decreasing oxygen – not changing their breathing frequency and taking longer to lose their balance (unlike the little fish).Although Murray cod of all sizes demonstrated an amazing ability to cope with high temperatures in the lab, McPhee and colleagues also went into the wild to check the water quality of three Queensland waterholes that are much loved by the cod. The researchers found that the fish are living dangerously close to the edge – at the limit of the high temperatures and low oxygen levels that they can endure – especially during the summer. And, as the smallest cod are most vulnerable to the combined stress of high temperature and low oxygen, this slow-growing species is at genuine risk from catastrophic loss if their littlest ones succumb in the face of the deadly duo.

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)0.001
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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.005

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 topicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations→French-language works237,207→