MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996974558 · doi:10.1139/z03-009

Interdemic variation in the African cyprinid<i>Barbus neumayeri</i>: correlations among hypoxia, morphology, and feeding performance

2003· article· en· W1996974558 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sarah Schaack, Lauren J. Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGillPredationTrophic levelSalmoBarbusEcologyZoologyOntogenyHabitatCyprinidaeFish <Actinopterygii>Fishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adaptive change in one character may affect associated, but functionally unrelated, characters in adaptive or nonadaptive ways. For example, adaptive change in gill size (i.e., larger gills in hypoxic habitats) may alter adjacent feeding structures and therefore have indirect effects on feeding behavior. This study examines whether differences in total gill filament length among populations of the African cyprinid Barbus neumayeri correlate with variation in trophic structures and feeding performance. Morphological measurements revealed larger total gill filament length in populations from low-oxygen habitats. Differences in external and internal morphology of the trophic apparatus correlated with those found in gills and suggest a reduction in food capture and processing ability in fish with larger respiratory apparatus. In paired feeding trials on a novel prey type, large-gilled fish spent more time feeding than small-gilled fish of the same body size without ingesting more food. This suggests less efficient food uptake in large-gilled fish from hypoxic habitats. We suggest that variation in gill size facilitates the broad habitat distribution of B. neumayeri but may limit the success of phenotypes crossing physicochemical gradients.

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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations49
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207