MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022595609 · doi:10.1139/f00-166

Krill: a possible model for investigating the effects of ocean currents on the genetic structure of a pelagic invertebrate

2000· article· en· W2022595609 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lorenzo Zane, Tomaso Patarnello

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEuphausiaKrillAntarctic krillPelagic zoneBiologyBiological dispersalCrustaceanGenetic structureInvertebrateEcologyEuphausiaceaPopulationOceanographyMarine invertebratesGenetic variationGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reviews the information available on the population genetics and systematics of krill (Euphausiidae, Crustacea), integrating the published data with new data collected in our laboratory. Phylogenetic analysis of several Antarctic and sub-Antarctic Euphausia species indicates the importance of dispersal in determining the present-day geographic distribution. Dating speciation events suggest that the formation of the Antarctic Convergence, the oceanographic barrier isolating the Southern Ocean, may have played a role in separating the ancestral Antarctic and sub-Antarctic lineages. Intraspecific data show that the Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba) is characterized by weak genetic differentiation, whereas the northern krill (Meganyctiphanes norvegica) is more structured showing discrete genetic pools. This difference can be explained, at least partly, by the oceanographic conditions in the areas inhabited by the two species.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations41
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207