Effect of ration on gonad development of the Pacific geoduck clam,<i>Panopea generosa</i>(Gould, 1850)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of ration on Panopea generosa gonad development was tested over 52 days. Clams were fed Isochrysis sp. and Chaetoceros muelleri (50 : 50 cell count) at rations of 0.8 × 109, 2.4 × 109, 4.0 × 109, 5.6 × 109, 7.2 × 109 and 10.0 × 109 cells clam−1 day−1 (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 and R6, respectively). The highest ration (R6) caused a 25% die-off within 3 days and was discontinued. Ration did not significantly affect condition index, gonadosomatic index, connective tissue occupation index or oocyte diameter. Clams fed the R5 ration (85% of which spawned from day 26 to 52) were more spent than clams in any other treatment with significantly fewer oocytes mm−2 than those fed the R1, R2 and R3 rations and significantly lower levels of sperm occupation than clams fed any other ration. Spawn percentages were low from day 26 to 52 in R1, R2 and R4 (15, 0 and 0%, respectively). Clams in the R3 treatment had a similar spawn percentage (100% from day 26 to 52) to those in the R5 treatment yet maintained gonads in a more ripened condition with higher levels of gamete occupation, making R3 the most likely ration to maximize gamete output over time.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".