Effects of aerial exposure on size of the common barnacle (Semibalanus balanoides), an inhabitant of the intertidal zone in St. Andrews, New Brunswick
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Survival in the intertidal zone for sessile marine invertebrates means enduring the drastic changes in environmental conditions that comes with tide cycling. An influential repercussion for Semibalanus balanoides, the common barnacle, is changes in food accessibility. As a filter-feeder, this intertidal organism does not obtain the required nutrients for growth when exposed to air and, as a result, experiences a compromised growth rate along with a limited body size. A four-day (August 16th-19th, 2009) field-based study was conducted at Indian Point in St. Andrews, New Brunswick to examine how duration of aerial exposure affects rostro-carinal length. Twenty 10cm x 10cm sites were sampled within which the total number of S.balanoides individuals was counted and rostro-carinal lengths of fifty individuals were measured. In support of the predicted results, this study shows that aerial exposure limits size in S.balanoides. This negative relationship between duration of aerial exposure and size is largely correlative, as supported by the R=0.9205 value obtained through application and analysis of the linear regression model. This information of how S.balanoides responds to the out of water experience may bring to light the significance of results from lab-based studies regarding environmental conditions that S.balanoides can tolerate.
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".