Fick’s Diffusion Laws and Scaling of the Gill Surface Area and Oxygen Uptake in Fish
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The oxygen consumption of adult fish (Q) is proportional to their body weight (W) raised to a power, estimated as the slope (dQ) of a linear regression of log(Q) vs. log(W). Similarly, the gill surface area of adult fish (GSA) is proportional to W raised to the power dG, as also estimated via a log-log linear proportional to their surface area. Moreover, because of Fick’s laws of diffusion, dQ should be at least similar to dG. Recently, the claim has been made that non-zero differences between dQ and dG invalidate the Gill-Oxygen Limitation Theory (GOLT), which suggests that the O2 supplied by gills growing with dG <1 limits the growth of older and larger fish. We show here, based on 33 pairs of dG and dQ in 33 fish species and other information that (i) while individual differences between dQ and dG are observed in several cases, there is no significant overall difference across the 33 estimates and (ii) large differences between dQ and dG are primarily due to ontogenetic changes in scaling (OCS), likely ontogenetic changes in gills’ water–blood (or ‘diffusion’) distance and, as well, multiple sources of experimental variability and potential errors, leading to outliers and random differences.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it