MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402555088 · doi:10.1111/jfb.15930

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?

2024· article· en· W4402555088 on OpenAlexafffund
Annie M. Trembley, Lauren E. Rowsey, Ben Speers‐Roesch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFundulusBiologyDiel vertical migrationMetabolic rateZoologyFisheryEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>Endocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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, MO 2 ) 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 MO 2 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 MO 2 , and activity by proxy, in mummichog. Thus, NIR illumination is a suitable method to visualize mummichog during light–dark diel cycles. Routine MO 2 , 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicWater Quality Monitoring TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207