Suction disk performance of echeneid fishes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The anatomy of the suction disk of two species of echeneid fishes, Echeneis naucrates L., 1758 and E. neucratoides Zuiew, 1786, is described, and measurements of their suction performance on both smooth and textured surfaces are given. Disk muscles erect or depress the numerous paired laminae, or toothed plates, which bear two to four rows of posteriorly directed spinules. The erect laminae create a sub-ambient chamber, allowing these fishes to adhere to other fish and inanimate objects. Resting sub-ambient suction pressure differentials were recorded, as were the greatest sub-ambient pressure differentials as the fish were pulled posteriorly to simulate drag induced by a swimming host. The resting pressure differential averaged –0.5 kPa, with no significant difference between Plexiglas ® and shark skin surfaces. With a force applied to their caudal peduncle, the echeneids generated suction pressure differentials averaging –92.7 kPa within the disk cavity while attached to Plexiglas. On shark skin, the use of spinules increased friction and reduced the maximum sub-ambient suction pressure differential to –46.6 kPa; considerably more force (17.4 N) was required to dislodge the echeneids from the shark skin than from the smooth Plexiglas (11.2 N).
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it