MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2028636170 · doi:10.1139/f06-107

Ultraviolet vision and foraging in juvenile bluegill (<i>Lepomis macrochirus</i>)

2006· article· en· W2028636170 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dina M. Leech, Sönke Johnsen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLepomis macrochirusForagingDaphniaJuvenileBiologyEcologyFreshwater ecosystemZoologyInvertebrateFisheryCrustaceanEcosystemFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultraviolet (UV) photoreceptors have been reported in a wide variety of freshwater and marine organisms, suggesting that UV vision is prominent in aquatic ecosystems. However, its adaptive significance remains speculative. The present study tested whether the foraging of juvenile bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) is enhanced in the presence of UV radiation (UVR). Laboratory feeding trials were conducted in a laminar flow tank in which L. macrochirus juveniles between 2.3 and 3.5 cm standard length were fed the cladoceran Daphnia magna. Sighting and striking distances, as well as capture success, were measured in the presence and absence of UVR. Mean sighting and striking distances and capture success did not differ significantly between the two light treatments. There were also no significant differences in the frequency distributions of sighting and striking distance. These results suggest that UV vision may not be used to enhance foraging in L. macrochirus on Daphnia within the size class tested.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations23
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→