Walking elicits muscle functional changes in the pectoral fin of <i>Polypterus senegalus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amphibious fishes are often used as models to help understand how early aquatic vertebrates overcame the mechanical and physical challenges posed by a terrestrial environment. The differences in posture and loading required on land affect fin function and, over longer durations, may elicit changes in muscle and tissue composition, altering performance. How the motor control patterns of fin muscles change in a walking gait is not known but may help explain the changes in bone remodelling and muscle fibre type that occur in Polypterus senegalus, when exercised or kept in a terrestrial environment. This study quantified instantaneous motor activation changes in all four fin muscle groups involved in the terrestrial walking gait in P. senegalus. We discovered that increases in the operating length of muscles and in the velocity of contraction (and subsequent expected rate of force production), prolonged muscle use, and changes in eccentric and antagonistic co-contraction occur in muscles when used for walking compared with swimming. It appears that subtle changes in motor patterns between swimming and walking can elicit large changes in functional performance, which helps explain muscle remodelling seen in fish that spend long periods of time in terrestrial environments.
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) | 0.002 | 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".