MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of lipid extraction on stable carbon and nitrogen isotope analyses of fish tissues: potential consequences for food web studies

2004· article· en· W2002285111 on OpenAlexafffund
M. A. Sotiropoulos, William M. Tonn, Leonard I. Wassenaar

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology Of Freshwater Fish · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Alberta
FundersParks CanadaNorthern Arizona University
KeywordsMuscle tissueJuvenileFish <Actinopterygii>Stable isotope ratioExtraction (chemistry)IsotopeBiologyChemistryLipid metabolismIsotope analysisBiochemistryEcologyChromatographyFisheryAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract – We examined whether solvent‐based lipid extractions, commonly used for stable isotope analysis (SIA) of biota, alters δ15N or δ13C values of fish muscle tissue or whole juvenile fish. Lipid extraction from muscle tissue led to only small (<1‰) isotope shifts in δ13C and δ15N values. By contrast, ecologically significant shifts (+3.4‰ for δ13C and +2.8‰ for δ15N) were observed for whole juvenile fish. Sample variance was not affected by lipid extraction. For tissue‐specific SIA, two sample aliquots may be required: a lipid‐extracted aliquot for stable carbon isotope analysis when differing lipid content among tissues is a concern, and a nonextracted aliquot for δ15N determination. Whole organism SIA is not recommended because of the mix of tissues having different turnover times; for very small fish, we recommend that fish be eviscerated, decapitated, and skinned to minimise differences with samples of muscle tissue.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations277
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology Of Freshwater FishSame topicIsotope Analysis in EcologyFrench-language works237,207