The neonate nutrition hypothesis: early feeding affects the body stoichiometry of <i><scp>D</scp>aphnia</i> offspring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Aquatic herbivores consume variable quantities and qualities of food. In freshwater systems, where phosphorus (P) is often a primary limiting element, inadequate dietary P can slow maternal growth and reduce body P content. There remains uncertainty about whether and how dietary effects on mothers are transferred to offspring by way of egg provisioning. Using the keystone herbivore Daphnia, we tested a novel explanation (the ‘neonate nutrition hypothesis’) to determine whether the early nutrition of newborns affects their elemental composition and whether the indications of differences in maternal P nutrition found previously might be overestimated. We thus examined the P content of mothers and their eggs from deposition through development to the birth of neonates. We examined further whether very short periods of ingestion (3 h) by the offspring alter the overall P content of juvenile Daphnia. We showed that strong dietary P effects on mothers were not directly transferred to their eggs. Irrespective of the supply of P in the maternal diet, the P content of eggs in different developmental stages and in (unfed) neonates did not differ. This indicates that Daphnia mothers do not reduce the quality (in terms of P) of newly produced offspring after intermittent periods (i.e. several days) of poor nutrition. In contrast, the P content of neonates reflected that of their food after brief periods of feeding, indicating that even temporary exposure to nutrient poor food immediately after birth may strongly affect the elemental composition of neonates. Our results thus support the neonate nutrition hypothesis, which, like differential maternal provisioning, is a possible explanation for the variable elemental quality of young Daphnia.
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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".