Ceratal autotomy and regeneration in the aeolid nudibranch <i>Phidiana crassicornis</i> and the role of predators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Ceratal autotomy by the aeolid nudibranch Phidinna crassicornis is common in the field and was induced in the laboratory by mechanical and predatory stimuli. The ceras detaches from the body wall along an autotomy plane located at its basal constriction. Cerata released copious amounts of mucus during autotomy and exhibited a prolonged writhing response that continued for several hours after detachment. Regeneration of cerata autotomized in the field and in the laboratory was documented. Four days after autotomy, regenerating cerata appeared as small protuberances. By day 24 the regenerates acquired their mature structural organisation and vivid colour. The cerata subsequently increased in length and diameter and were indistin‐guishable from surrounding cerata by 41 to 43 days after autotomy. Regeneration rates of cerata induced to autotomize in the laboratory and regeneration of cerata autotomized in the field were similar, averaging 0.08 and 0.067 mdday, respectively. The sequence of morphological events involved with regeneration following experimental and natural induction of autotomy was identical. The kelp crab Pugettia productn induced autotomy by holding cerata with its chelae. This crab also fed on autotomized cerata and consumed locomotory and ceratal mucus. Ceratal autotomy may be an important mechanism of escape from this predatory crustacean. Other potential predators including hermit crabs and tidepool sculpins did not elicit defensive behaviour in P. crussicornis. Nematocysts were present in the enidosacs and their role in defense was investigated. Fired nematocysts were observed in podia of the asteroid Crossaster papposus following ceratal contact but were not seen in the podia of Pycnopodia helianthoides in a similar trial. For P. crassicornis, the cnidosacs may function primarily as a storage device for safe sequestering of nematoeysts that could pose a threat to the digestive system. They did not play a major defensive role against the predators tested, but may be important in the field against other predators.
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".