MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1833033513 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v117i3.748

First record of the European Giant File Clam, <em>Acesta excavata</em> (Bivalvia: Pectinoidea: Limidae), in the Northwest Atlantic

2003· article· en· W1833033513 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Jean-Marc Gagnon, Richard L. Haedrich

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine Biology and Ecology Research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandCanadian Museum of Nature
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFjordOutcropBayHabitatOceanographyBivalviaGeographyFisheryContinental shelfGeologyMolluscaEcologyBiologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two large bivalve specimens collected in Bay d’Espoir, a deep fjord situated on the south coast of Newfoundland, are described and identified as belonging to the species Acesta excavata (Fabricius 1779). In situ observations onboard the manned submersible PISCES IV and color videos have provided information on the vertical distribution, density and habitat of the species. Maximum abundances of about 15 large individuals/m2 occurred on sheltered rock outcrops at depth ranging from 550 to 775 m, where warm (6°C) continental slope water is found. Differences in shape and thickness between the valves of the two specimens appear to be related to the degree of exposure to rock falls (i.e., sheltered versus exposed habitat). Prior to this account, the European Giant File Clam had never been encountered west of the Azores Islands in the North Atlantic.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2003
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist→Same topicMarine Biology and Ecology Research→French-language works237,207→