MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978875029 · doi:10.1139/z02-011

Carapace and mandibles ontogeny in the Dendrobranchiata (Decapoda), Euphausiacea, and Mysidacea (Crustacea): a phylogenetic interest

2002· article· en· W1978875029 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bernadette Casanova, Laetitia De Jong, Xavier Moreau

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyCarapaceMysidaceaEuphausiaceaDecapodaCrustaceanAnatomyZoologyEuphausia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ontogeny of the carapace and the mandibles has been studied for one species of Dendrobranchiata (Decapoda), four species of Euphausiacea, and three species of Mysidacea (one species of Lophogastrida and two species of Mysida). The protocephalic origin of the carapace, which arises from the antennar tergite, is confirmed. During larval development the progressive dorsal insertion of the carapace leads to the opening of the tergites of both cephalic and thoracic segments. The opening of the eight thoracic segments (TS) occurs in Euphausiacea and Decapoda only, and is done in three steps (TS1; TS1–TS3 or TS1–TS4; TS1–TS8). In adult Mysidacea, the insertion of the carapace exhibits two levels of evolution (opening of TS1 in Gnathophausia species and of TS1–TS4 in the others). Thus, in the larvae of Euphausiacea and Decapoda, the most evolved taxa, the progressive insertion of the carapace corresponds to the carapace locations in the adults of the most ancient taxa, i.e., Mysidacea. The location of the internal musculature of the mandibles, which is known for certain to characterize the different parts of the arthropodial segment, and their development, shows that the gnathal part of each mandible is prolonged by a pleural part and half the residual tergite of the mandibular segment.

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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations12
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207