MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Locomotory and feeding effectors of the tornaria larva of <i>Balanoglossus biminiensis</i>

2001· article· en· W1867214086 on OpenAlexafffund
Thurston C. Lacalli, T. H. J. Gilmour

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Zoologica · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMarine Sponges and Natural Products
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFlorida State University
KeywordsBiologyAnatomyLarvaTuftCiliumHindgutCell biologyMidgutEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Lacalli, T. C. and Gilmour, T. H. J. 2001. Locomotory and feeding effectors of the tornaria larva of Balanoglossus biminiensis . — Acta Zoologica (Stockholm) 82 : 117–126 The tornaria ciliary bands and oesophagus were examined ultrastructurally to identify the neural components that control larval behaviour. The circumoral ciliary band is known to be innervated in part by fibres from the apical plate and adoral nerve centres. Within the band itself, however, the only neurones we could find were multipolar cells, an unusual cell type with apical processes that traverse the surface of the band. Similar cells occur in the circumoral bands of echinoderm larvae. The tornaria telotroch has a much larger nerve, but no neurones were found either in the band or nearby, so the source of the fibres in the telotroch nerve remains unknown. In addition to having different innervation, the two bands also respond differently to cholinergic agonists, which elicit telotroch arrests but have no visible effect on the circumoral band. The oesophagus has a well‐developed musculature and an extensive nerve plexus. During feeding, the oesophagus repeatedly contracts, forcing excess water out along two lateral channels prior to swallowing. These channels are also sites of gill slit formation, so there is evidently a continuity between the water bypass mechanism of the larva and that of the postmetamorphic juvenile.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations39
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa ZoologicaSame topicMarine Sponges and Natural ProductsFrench-language works237,207