MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096113253 · doi:10.1242/jeb.024851

Ammonia and urea transporters in gills of fish and aquatic crustaceans

2009· review· en· W2096113253 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGillCrustaceanUreaFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryAmmoniaZoologyChemistryBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The diversity of mechanisms of ammonia and urea excretion by the gills and other epithelia of aquatic organisms, especially fish and crustaceans, has been studied for decades. Although the decades-old dogma of ;aquatic species excrete ammonia' still explains nitrogenous waste excretion for many species, it is clear that there are many mechanistic variations on this theme. Even within species that are ammonoteles, the process is not purely ;passive', often relying on the energizing effects of proton and sodium-potassium ATPases. Within the ammonoteles, Rh (Rhesus) proteins are beginning to emerge as vital ammonia conduits. Many fishes are also known to be capable of substantial synthesis and excretion of urea as a nitrogenous waste. In such species, members of the UT family of urea transporters have been identified as important players in urea transport across the gills. This review attempts to draw together recent information to update the mechanisms of ammonia and urea transport by the gills of aquatic species. Furthermore, we point out several potentially fruitful avenues for further research.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.272 · 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