Cardiorespiratory physiology and swimming capacity of Atlantic salmon (<i>Salmo salar</i>) at cold temperatures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated how acclimation to 8, 4 and 1°C, and acute cooling from 8 to 1°C, affected the Atlantic salmon's aerobic and anaerobic metabolism, and cardiac function, during a critical swim speed (Ucrit) test. This study revealed several interesting temperature-dependent effects. First, while differences in resting heart rate (fH) between groups were predictable based on previous research (range ∼28-65 beats min-1), with values for 1°C-acclimated fish slightly higher than those of acutely exposed conspecifics, the resting cardiac output () of 1°C-acclimated fish was much lower and compensated for by a higher resting blood oxygen extraction (ṀO2/). In contrast, the acutely exposed fish had a ∼2-fold greater resting stroke volume (VS) compared with that of the other groups. Second, increases in fH (1.2- to 1.4-fold) contributed little to during the Ucrit test, and the contributions of (VS) versus ṀO2/ to aerobic scope (AS) were very different in the two groups tested at 1°C (1°C-acclimated and 8-1°C fish). Finally, Ucrit was 2.08 and 1.69 body lengths (BL) s-1 in the 8 and 4°C-acclimated groups, but only 1.27 and 1.44 BL s-1 in the 1°C-acclimated and 8-1°C fish, respectively - this lower value in 1°C versus 8-1°C fish despite higher values for maximum metabolic rate and AS. These data: support recent studies which suggest that the capacity to increase fH is constrained at low temperatures; show that cardiorespiratory function at cold temperatures, and its response to increased demands, depends on exposure duration; and suggest that AS does not constrain swimming capacity in salmon when chronically exposed to temperatures approaching their lower limit.
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".