MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005262777 · doi:10.2989/16085914.2012.694683

Histological assessment of gonad maturation in<i>Labeo parvus</i>(Teleostei: Cyprinidae) in Benin

2012· article· de· W2005262777 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Élie Montchowui, Philippe Compère, Marc Thiry, Philippe Lalèyé, J-C Philippart, Pascal Poncin

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Journal of Aquatic Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFish Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité de LiègeAgence Universitaire de la Francophonie
KeywordsGonadBiologyVitellogenesisDevelopment of the gonadsTeleosteiAndrologyOocyteSpermatogenesisZoologyCyprinidaeOogenesisYolkNucleolusAnatomyFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryCell biologyEndocrinologyEmbryo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A histological analysis was undertaken on the gonad development of Labeo parvus Boulenger 1902, a medium-sized cyprinid from the Ouémé River, Benin. Samples were collected monthly between April 2006 and March 2007 and were examined using routine macroscopic and histological techniques. Five macroscopic stages of gonad maturation were identified in the ovaries and testes and described histologically. Oocyte development was subdivided into five stages, based on the presence of chromatin nucleolus oocytes, perinucleolus oocytes, yolk vesicle oocytes, vitellogenic oocytes and mature oocytes. Four stages of spermatogenesis (spermatogonia, spermatocytes, spermatids and spermatozoa) were observed. Comparisons of macroscopic and histological observations revealed that the temporal patterns of maturation activity obtained from visual examination closely reflected the seasonal histological trend in gonad development. Histological characteristics of spent ovaries and testes were similar to those of immature fish, indicating that L. parvus were synchronous iteroparous spawners.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Journal of Aquatic ScienceSame topicFish Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207