MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1546974120 · doi:10.1111/jfb.12758

Evolution, ecology and physiology of amphibious killifishes (Cyprinodontiformes)

2015· review· en· W1546974120 on OpenAlexafffund
Andy J. Turko, Patricia A. Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish biology, ecology, and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyCyprinodontiformesEcologyIntertidal zonePredationHabitatKillifishEphemeral keyZoologyFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The order Cyprinodontiformes contains an exceptional diversity of amphibious taxa, including at least 34 species from six families. These cyprinodontiforms often inhabit intertidal or ephemeral habitats characterized by low dissolved oxygen or otherwise poor water quality, conditions that have been hypothesized to drive the evolution of terrestriality. Most of the amphibious species are found in the Rivulidae, Nothobranchiidae and Fundulidae. It is currently unclear whether the pattern of amphibiousness observed in the Cyprinodontiformes is the result of repeated, independent evolutions, or stems from an amphibious common ancestor. Amphibious cyprinodontiforms leave water for a variety of reasons: some species emerse only briefly, to escape predation or capture prey, while others occupy ephemeral habitats by living for months at a time out of water. Fishes able to tolerate months of emersion must maintain respiratory gas exchange, nitrogen excretion and water and salt balance, but to date knowledge of the mechanisms that facilitate homeostasis on land is largely restricted to model species. This review synthesizes the available literature describing amphibious lifestyles in cyprinodontiforms, compares the behavioural and physiological strategies used to exploit the terrestrial environment and suggests directions and ideas for future research.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.795
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.264 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations55
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicFish biology, ecology, and behaviorFrench-language works237,207