When the Going Gets Tough, the Females Get Going: Sex‐Specific Physiological Responses to Simultaneous Exposure to Hypoxia and Marine Heatwave Events in a Ubiquitous Copepod
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The existence of sex‐specific differences in phenotypic traits is widely recognized. Yet they are often ignored in studies looking at the impact of global changes on marine organisms, particularly within the context of combined drivers that are known to elicit complex interactions. We tested sex‐specific physiological responses of the cosmopolitan and ecologically important marine copepod Acartia tonsa exposed to combined hypoxia and marine heatwave (MHW) conditions, both of which individually strongly affect marine ectotherms. Females and males were acutely exposed for 5 days to a combination of either control (18°C) or a high temperature mimicking a MHW (25°C), and normoxia (100% O2 sat.) or mild hypoxia (35% O2 sat.). Life‐history traits, as well as sex‐specific survival and physiological traits, were measured. Females had overall higher thermal tolerance levels and responded differently than males when exposed to the combined global change drivers investigated. Females also showed lower metabolic thermal sensitivity when compared to males. Additionally, the MHW exerted a dominant effect on the traits investigated, causing a lower survival and higher metabolic rate at 25°C. However, egg production rates appeared unaffected by hypoxia and MHW conditions. Our results showed that MHWs could strongly affect copepods' survival, that combined exposure to hypoxia and MHW exerted an interactive effect only on CTmax, and that sex‐specific vulnerability to these global change drivers could have major implications for population dynamics. Our results highlight the importance of considering the differences in the responses of females and males to rapid environmental changes to improve the implementation of climate‐smart conservation approaches.
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".