Contribution of food availability to the more rapid growth of the scallop, <i>Euvola ziczac</i> (Pteroida, Pectinidae) in bottom than in suspended culture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted a 5-month experiment at Turpialito in the Golfo de Cariaco, Venezuela, to examine whether the previously reported more rapid growth of scallop Euvola ziczac in bottom compared to suspended culture can be attributed to more abundant or higher quality food resources near the sediment/water interface. The various body components (shell, muscle, digestive gland, gonad and remaining tissues) increased in size at a much greater rate for scallops maintained on the bottom, in partly buried cages at 5 m in depth, than in cages suspended at the same depth in the water column. Furthermore, survival was greater on the bottom. Food abundance and quality were examined by analyzing the seston collected in sediment traps at the sediment/water interface in the vicinity of the bottom cages and next to the suspended cages. Phytoplankton abundance (chlorophyll a) and the proportion of various fatty acids in the lipid fraction of the seston were similar on the bottom and in suspension. However, sestonic protein, lipid and carbohydrate levels, and the estimated energetic content of the seston, were higher on the bottom than in suspension, and probably contributed to the greater growth on the bottom. As the increase in the energetic content of the seston on the bottom compared to in suspension was less than the increase in growth (biomass) on the bottom compared to in suspension, and the evidence showed in previous studies above the negative influence of fouling and wave action in suspended culture, we conclude that the more rapid growth of Euvola ziczac in bottom than suspended culture is principally due to stress relative to suspended culture system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".