Is the diel cycle of routine metabolic rate in mummichog (<i>Fundulus heteroclitus</i>) affected by near‐infrared lighting used for visualizing behavior of fishes at night?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The metabolic rate of a freely moving fish (routine metabolic rate) is tightly coupled with volitional movement (spontaneous activity), both of which commonly show strong daily cycles linked to the species‐specific diel activity pattern. Mummichog (Fundulus heteroclitus), an important estuarine fish in the north western Atlantic Ocean, are historically reported as diurnal (i.e., more active during daylight). Our recent laboratory studies on a Bay of Fundy population, however, showed a free‐running (i.e., similarly active daytime and night‐time) or even nocturnal (i.e., more active at night‐time) diel activity pattern. In the laboratory, near‐infrared (NIR) illumination is commonly used with a NIR‐sensitive camera to visualize fish activity across the light–dark periods of the day. Because NIR light is close to the visible light spectrum and certain fishes show sensitivity to NIR, the use of NIR with mummichog possibly could disturb the animals and obscure the identification of their true diel activity pattern. We aimed to determine if NIR illumination (940 nm wavelength) influences the diel activity pattern of mummichog. We used measurements of routine metabolic rate (oxygen consumption rate, MO2) as a proxy for activity, as evaluating the effect of NIR requires treatments where NIR lights are off, which precludes visualization and direct assessment of fish activity at night‐time. We measured routine MO2 of mummichogs over 6 days, exposed to either NIR off–on–off (2 days for each off or on period) or the opposite sequence of NIR on–off–on (to control for time‐dependent effects). NIR lights did not influence the diel cycle of routine MO2, and activity by proxy, in mummichog. Thus, NIR illumination is a suitable method to visualize mummichog during light–dark diel cycles. Routine MO2, and presumably activity, was similar or higher during night‐time periods compared to daytime periods, confirming a free‐running or nocturnal activity pattern for at least certain populations of mummichog.
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".