The role of the heart in the evolution of aerobic performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aerobic metabolism underlies vital traits such as locomotion and thermogenesis, and aerobic capacity influences fitness in many animals. The heart is a key determinant of aerobic capacity, but the relative influence of cardiac output versus other steps in the O2 transport pathway remains contentious. In this Commentary, we consider this issue by examining the mechanistic basis for adaptive increases in aerobic capacity (thermogenic V̇O2,max; also called summit metabolism) in deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) native to high altitude. Thermogenic V̇O2,max is increased by acclimation to cold hypoxia (simulating high-altitude conditions), and high-altitude populations generally have greater V̇O2,max than their low-altitude counterparts. This plastic and evolved variation in V̇O2,max is associated with corresponding variation in maximal cardiac output, along with variation in other traits across the O2 pathway (e.g. arterial O2 saturation, blood haemoglobin content and O2 affinity, tissue O2 extraction, tissue oxidative capacity). By applying fundamental principles of gas exchange, we show that the relative influence of cardiac output on V̇O2,max depends on the O2 diffusing capacity of thermogenic tissues (skeletal muscles and brown adipose tissues). Functional interactions between cardiac output and blood haemoglobin content determine circulatory O2 delivery and thus affect V̇O2,max, particularly in high-altitude environments where erythropoiesis can increase haematocrit and blood viscosity. There may also be functional linkages between cardiac output and tissue O2 diffusion due to the role of blood flow in determining capillary haematocrit and red blood cell flux. Therefore, the functional interactions between cardiac output and other traits in the O2 pathway underlie the adaptive evolution of aerobic capacities.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".