MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A physiological interpretation of pattern changes in a flatfish

2008· article· en· W1981402236 on OpenAlexaff
D. Burton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMelanophoreBiologyMelanosomeFlatfishChromatophoreWinter flounderDispersion (optics)FlounderIncubationBiophysicsZoologyFish <Actinopterygii>OpticsFisheryMelaninBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pattern‐related capacity for the dispersion of previously aggregated melanosomes in low concentrations (3 × 10−6 to 10−8 M) of noradrenaline in vitro was observed in melanophores from winter flounder Pseudopleuronectes americanus. With 10−8 M noradrenaline, dispersion was completed more rapidly than in controls using the incubation vehicle alone. Melanophores from white‐spot, dark‐band and general background components of the integumentary pattern displayed different ‘transition ranges’ between melanosome aggregation and dispersion in higher and lower concentrations of noradrenaline. Within each ‘transition range’ individual noradrenaline concentration decrements could result in highly variable degrees of melanosome dispersion. The relative breadth of the noradrenaline ‘transition range’ concentrations could be represented as dark bands > general background > white spots. The threshold noradrenaline concentration for dispersion was highest for the dark bands. It is concluded that these differences represent variations in the transition from melanophore α‐adrenoceptor‐mediated pigment aggregation to β‐adrenoceptor‐mediated dispersion between localized areas of the skin. Such variations in ‘transition range’ will have an important role in the expression of flatfish patterns and in their changes in colour and texture.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207