Morphology and histochemistry of the peripheral olfactory organ and behavioural responses by the round goby, Neogobius melanostomus , to putative pheromones and conspecific extracts.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study links the anatomy of the peripheral olfactory organ in the bottom-dwelling round goby (Neogobius melanostomus) with behavioural responses to putative pheromones and conspecific extracts. The spatial organization of the nasal cavity was examined using impression material injection, immunocytochemistry, and transmission electron microscopy. The peripheral olfactory organ had a compact structure with an olfactory chamber that contained a single longitudinal lamella. Prominent dorsocaudal lachrymal and ethmoid accessory nasal sacs were situated ventrocaudal to the chamber. The location of the olfactory mucosa within the olfactory chamber is novel for teleost fish, as it extends dorsally beyond the ventral surface. Microvillar and ciliated olfactory sensory neurons were identified by transmission electron microscopy. Galphaolf-immunoreactive ciliated olfactory sensory neurons and Galpha0-immunoreactive microvillar olfactory sensory neurons were located throughout the olfactory epithelium. Galpha0-immunoreactive crypt cells were also found throughout the olfactory epithelium of some specimens. The effect of female conspecific urogenital extracts on ventilation was studied on male round gobies. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)Dept. of Biological Sciences. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2002 .B45. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 41-04, page: 1023. Advisers: Lynda D. Corkum; Barbara Zielinski. Thesis (M.Sc.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2002.
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) | 0.001 | 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".