MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Anatomical and Histological Characteristics of the Intestine of the Topmouth Culter (Culter alburnus)

2011· article· en· W1489678922 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Xiaojuan Cao, W. M. Wang, Fangyu Song

Bibliographic record

VenueAnatomia Histologia Embryologia · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsLarge intestineBiologySmall intestineAnatomyDigestion (alchemy)ChemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: With 3 figures and 1 table SUMMARY: Topmouth culter (Culter alburnus), a freshwater carnivorous fish of the Cyprinidae, is one of the most popular fish species in aquatic market in China. The anatomy and histology features of fish intestine are very useful for understanding digestive physiology, diagnosing some intestinal diseases and formulating suitable feeds. Thus, here we first characterize topmouth culter intestine via light microscope, transmission electron microscope and scan electron microscope. The 'Z' shaped intestine can be divided into three parts (e.g. the anterior intestine, middle intestine and posterior intestine), with an intestinal coefficient of 0.68. The anterior intestine possessed the longest mucosa folds and thickest muscularis among the three intestinal parts, and microvilli were very well-developed whilst many mitochondria, endoplasmic reticulums and lysosomes were found in which. This indicated the anterior intestine was a main region for digestion and absorption of food in the topmouth culter. While the vacuoles observed in the posterior intestine may be closely related to the intracellular digestion. Neutral and acid mucus were strongly present throughout the intestine. This detailed descriptive paper will be very helpful for studies of topmouth culter related to its digestive physiology, intestinal disease control and feed nutrient.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnatomia Histologia EmbryologiaSame topicAquaculture Nutrition and GrowthFrench-language works237,207