The relationship between nucleolar organizer size and growth in<i>Chironomus riparius</i>larvae (Diptera:Chironomidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chironomid larvae possess giant polytene chromosomes. When genes on these chromosomes undergo transcription, they are visible as puffs. The nucleolar organizer region (NOR), visible as an especially large puff, shrinks when a larva is at particular developmental stages or is subjected to chemical stress. However, whether reduced NOR size is indicative of reduced growth is unknown. Therefore, we conducted 2 experiments to examine the relationship between NOR size and chironomid growth under controlled laboratory conditions. In the 1st experiment, we quantified the effect of ration quality on larval growth and NOR size. In the 2nd, we determined whether NOR size varied as a function of recent growth, independently of larval size. The combined results demonstrated that NOR size varied as a function of prepupal development and was positively correlated with a chironomid’s most recent growth rate, independently of its biomass. The finding that NOR size is related to growth validates its use as a biomarker of sublethal stress. NOR size also has potential value as a measure of instantaneous growth state of field-collected larvae and, thus, may provide a surrogate measure useful for estimating secondary production in natural populations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".