Ultrastructural changes in gill chloride cells during smoltification in wild and hatchery-reared masu salmon Oncorhynchus masou
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ultrastructural changes in gill chloride cells during smoltification were examined in wild and hatchery-reared masu salmon. On the filament, two types of chloride cells (α and β) and accessory cells were observed in wild fish from January (parr) to May (full-smolt), while only α and accessory cells (α-a cells) were observed in hatchery-reared fish from March (pre-smolt) to May (full-smolt). Among α-a cells of both types of fish, development of rough endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and Golgi apparatus was detected in pre-smolt before full-smolt. However, ultrastructural changes were not revealed in β cells of wild fish during smoltification. During smoltification, the α-a cell number increased and β cell number decreased. On the lamella, only one type of chloride cell was observed in both wild and hatchery-reared fish during smoltification. Their ultrastructural changes were almost the same as those in filament α-a cells, and their number declined during smoltification. Although there was almost no difference between changes in ultrastructure or in the number of chloride cells in both wild and hatchery-reared fish during smoltification, the chloride cell number of hatchery-reared fish varied widely in comparison to that in wild fish. The present study is the first report for wild salmonids of ultrastructural changes in gill chloride cells during smoltification, and indicated that there were some ultrastructural differences between gill chloride cells of wild masu salmon and hatchery-reared fish.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".