Lipid Class and Fatty Acid Content of the Leptocephalus Larva of Tropical Eels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The leptocephalus larva of eels distinguishes the elopomorph fishes from all other bony fishes. The leptocephalus is long lived and increases in size primarily through the synthesis and deposition of glycosaminoglycans. Energy stored during the larval stage, in the form of glycosaminoglycan and lipids, is required to fuel migration, metamorphosis and metabolism of the subsequent glass eel stage. Despite the importance of energy storage by leptocephali for survival and recruitment, their diet, condition and lipid content and composition is essentially unknown. To gain further insight into energy storage and condition of leptocephali, we determined the lipid class and fatty acid concentration of larvae collected on a cross-shelf transect off Broome, northwestern Australia. The total lipid concentration of two families and four sub-families of leptocephali ranged from 2.7 to 7.0 mg g wet weight(-1), at the low end of the few published values. Phospholipid and triacylglycerol made up ca. 63 % of the total lipid pool. The triacylglycerol:sterol ratio, an index of nutritional condition, ranged from 0.9 to 3.7, indicating that the leptocephali were in good condition. The predominant fatty acids were 16:0 (23 mol%), 22:6n-3 (docosahexaenoic acid, DHA, 16 mol%), 18:0 (8.2 mol%), 20:5n-3 (eicosapentaenoic acid, EPA, 6.7 mol%), 18:1n-9 (6.4 mol%) and 16:1n-7 (6.3 mol%). The DHA:EPA ratio ranged from 2.4 to 2.9, sufficient for normal growth and development of fish larvae generally. The leptocephali had proportions of bacterial markers >4.4 %, consistent with the possibility that they consume appendicularian houses or other marine snow that is bacteria rich.
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 | 0.001 | 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".