MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006279356 · doi:10.1163/1937240x-00002150

Effect of temperature on development rate of larvae from cold-water American lobster (Homarus americanus)

2013· article· en· W2006279356 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Brady K. Quinn, Bernard Sainte‐Marie, Rémy Rochette, Patrick Ouellet

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crustacean Biology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersMemorial University of Newfoundland
KeywordsAmerican lobsterHomarusLarvaBiologyPopulationFisheryEcologyPeninsulaBayCrustaceanOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The duration of the larval phase of the American lobster influences the distance larvae drift, and thus the potential settlement and recruitment patterns of lobsters to local populations and fisheries. The duration of larval stages is influenced by temperature, with warmer temperatures resulting in faster development and shorter stage duration. The quantitative relationship between temperature and duration of larval stages has been previously investigated, but only for lobsters originating from relatively warm-water regions. We examined the effects of temperature on stage duration for lobster larvae originating from a cold-water region, the northern shore of the Gaspé Peninsula in the northern Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada. We reared larvae individually using a new experimental apparatus with automated movement of culture containers to facilitate water exchange. We compared observed duration of larval stages for these cold-water source larvae to durations in previous studies that used warmer-water source larvae. We observed |$38\% $| shorter development times at the coldest temperature used |$(10^\circ {\rm{C}})$| and 47, 50, and |$100\% $| longer development times at warmer temperatures (14, 18 and |$22^\circ {\rm{C}}$|⁠, respectively) than at the same temperatures in previous studies of warm-water larvae, suggesting potential geographic variation in the functional relationship between temperature and larval development time. Given these results, future research should examine this question in more detail, to enhance understanding of lobster ecology and population dynamics across the species’ range.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations59
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crustacean BiologySame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207