MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

External morphology of a Slovenian population of pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus (L.) from a habitat with extreme thermal conditions

2005· article· en· W2071938752 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. Sumer, Meta Povž, M. Slatner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Ichthyology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVedecká Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR a SAV
KeywordsLepomisBiologyFecundityEcologyHabitatMorphology (biology)CentrarchidaePopulationZoologyPredationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The external morphology and growth variability of morphometric characters of pumpkinseed (n = 141) from an oxbow (River Sava, Slovenia) that receives thermal effluent were examined using triple regression analysis. Differences in external morphology between pumpkinseed from the oxbow and both native North American (River Otonabee, Looncall Lake, Canada) and non-native Central European populations (side arms of the River Danube, Slovakia) were evaluated. Two possible morphotypes among adults were observed, whereas the morphology of juveniles appears rather uniform across geographical location (i.e. Otonabee, Looncall, Danube). This suggests that environmental conditions, i.e. epigenetical information, seem to be responsible for most of variability in pumpkinseed morphology, which represents a function of epigenetical mechanisms. However, further investigation into epigenetical interactions, especially early development, fecundity, number of spawning acts per season, parental care, egg size and age at maturation are necessary to test this hypothesis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations23
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied IchthyologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207