Major muscle systems in the larval caenogastropod, <i>Ilyanassa obsoleta</i>, display different patterns of development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study describes the anatomical and developmental aspects of muscular development from the early embryo to competent larval stage in the gastropod Ilyanassa obsoleta. Staining of F-actin revealed differential spatial and temporal patterns of several muscles. In particular, two major muscles, the larval retractor and pedal retractor muscles originate independently and display distinct developmental patterns similar to observations in other gastropod species. Additionally, together with the larval retractor muscle, the accessory larval muscle developed in the embryo at the trochophore stage. Therefore, both these muscles develop prior to ontogenetic torsion. The pedal retractor muscle marked the most abundant growth in the mid veliger stage. Also during the middle stage, the metapodial retractor muscle and opercular retractor muscle grew concurrently with development of the foot. We show evidence that juvenile muscles, such as the buccal mass muscle and siphon muscle develop initially during the late veliger stage. Collectively, these findings substantiate that larval myogenesis involves a complex sequence of events that appear evolutionary conserved within the gastropods, and set the stage for future studies using this model species to address issues concerning the evolution and eventual fates of larval musculature in molluscs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".