MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030061013 · doi:10.1139/z06-187

Effect of lipid extraction on analyses of stable carbon and stable nitrogen isotopes in coastal organisms of the Aleutian archipelago

2007· article· en· W2030061013 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mark A. Ricca, A. Keith Miles, Robert G. Anthony, X. Deng, Silas S.O. Hung

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWestern Ecological Research Center, U.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Navy
KeywordsBiologyPelagic zoneMuscle tissueZoologyExtraction (chemistry)ArchipelagoSeabirdδ13CFisheryAnimal scienceStable isotope ratioEcologyAnatomyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We tested whether extracting lipids reduced confounding variation in δ 13 C and δ 15 N values by analyzing paired lipid-extracted (LE) and non-lipid-extracted (NLE) samples of bald eagle ( Haliaeetus leucocephalus (L., 1766)) whole eggs, muscle tissue from nine seabird and one terrestrial bird species, muscle tissue from four marine fish species, and blue mussels ( Mytilus edulis L., 1758) collected from the Aleutian archipelago, Alaska. Lipid extraction significantly increased δ 13 C by an average of 2.0‰ in whole eggs, 0.8‰ in avian muscle, 0.2‰ in fish muscle, and 0.6‰ in blue mussels. Lower δ 13 C values in NLE samples covaried positively with lipid content across all sample types. Lower δ 13 C values in NLE samples were not correlated with lipid content within bald eagle eggs and blue mussels, but covaried positively with percent lipid in avian and fish muscles. Neither lipid extraction nor percent lipid significantly changed δ 15 N values for any sample type. Lower δ 13 C values in most NLE avian and fish muscle tissues should not confound interpretation of pelagic versus nearshore sources of primary production, but lipid extraction may be necessary when highly precise estimates of δ 13 C are needed. Lipid extraction may not be necessary when only δ 15 N is of interest.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.509
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations59
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicIsotope Analysis in EcologyFrench-language works237,207