Estimating maximum oxygen uptake of fishes during swimming and following exhaustive chase - different results, biological bases and applications.

The maximum rate at which animals take up oxygen from their environment (MO2,max) is a crucial aspect of their physiology and ecology. In fishes, MO2,max is commonly quantified by measuring oxygen uptake either during incremental swimming tests or during recovery from an exhaustive chase. In this Commentary, we compile recent studies that apply both techniques to the same fish and show that the two methods typically yield different mean estimates of MO2,max for a group of individuals. Furthermore, within a group of fish, estimates of MO2,max determined during swimming are poorly correlated with estimates determined during recovery from chasing (i.e. an individual's MO2,max is not repeatable across methods). One explanation for the lack of agreement is that these methods measure different physiological states, each with their own behavioural, anatomical and biochemical determinants. We propose that these methods are not directly interchangeable but, rather, each is suited to address different questions in fish biology. We suggest that researchers select the method that reflects the biological contexts of their study, and we advocate for the use of accurate terminology that acknowledges the technique used to elevate MO2 (e.g. peak MO2,swim or peak MO2,recovery). If the study's objective is to estimate the 'true' MO2,max of an individual or species, we recommend that pilot studies compare methods, preferably using repeated-measures designs. We hope that these recommendations contribute new insights into the causes and consequences of variation in MO2,max within and among fish species.

Comparing methods for determining the metabolic capacity of lumpfish (Cyclopterus lumpus Linnaeus 1758).

Lumpfish (Cyclopterus lumpus) mortalities have been reported during the summer at some North Atlantic salmon cage-sites where they serve as "cleaner fish." To better understand this species' physiology and whether limitations in their metabolic capacity and thermal tolerance can explain this phenomenon, we compared the aerobic scope (AS) of 6°C-acclimated lumpfish (~50 g and 8.8 cm in length at the beginning of experiments) when all individuals (N = 12) were given a chase to exhaustion, a critical swim speed (Ucrit) test, and a critical thermal maximum (CTMax) test (rate of warming 2°C h-1). The Ucrit and CTMax of the lumpfish were 2.36 ± 0.08 body lengths per second and 20.6 ± 0.3°C. The AS of lumpfish was higher during the Ucrit test (206.4 ± 8.5 mg O2 kg-1 h-1) versus that measured in either the CTMax test or after the chase to exhaustion (141.0 ± 15.0 and 124.7 ± 15.5 mg O2 kg-1 h-1, respectively). Maximum metabolic rate (MMR), AS, and "realistic" AS (ASR) measured using the three different protocols were not significantly correlated, indicating that measurements of metabolic capacity using one of these methods cannot be used to estimate values that would be obtained using another method. Additional findings include that (1) the lumpfish's metabolic capacity is comparable to that of Atlantic cod, suggesting that they are not as "sluggish" as previously suggested in the literature, and (2) their CTMax (20.6°C when acclimated to 6°C), in combination with their recently determined ITMax (20.6°C when acclimated to 10°C), indicates that high sea-cage temperatures are unlikely to be the primary cause of lumpfish mortalities at salmon sea-cages during the summer.