Morphogenesis during asexual reproduction in Pygospio elegans Claparede (Annelida, Polychaeta)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The spionid Pygospio elegans reproduces both asexually and sexually. Using scanning electron and bright field microscopy, we examined morphogenesis following asexual reproduction to determine how "lost" body regions were regenerated after a worm spontaneously divided. Asexual reproduction occurred through transverse fission and divided the parent worm into 2 to 6 fragments (architomy). All fragments retained their original anterior-posterior polarity. Regeneration in all fragments followed a specific series of events: wound healing (day 1); extension of the blastema to generate lost body regions-specifically, the head and thorax for posterior fragments and the tail and pygidium for anterior fragments (days 2-3); segmentation (days 3-6); and differentiation of segment- or region-specific structures (days 4-8). This pattern occurred regardless of where the original division took place. Subsequent growth occurred through addition of terminal setigers anterior to the pygidium followed by differentiation of tail setigers into abdominal setigers, leaving the tail region about 6 to 10 setigers in size. Division rates were compared in worms from three populations in Nova Scotia, Canada. Worms from two populations (Conrad's Beach, Starr's Point) divided more frequently (about 1.2 and 1.3 weeks between divisions, respectively) than worms from Bon Portage Island (3.5 weeks between divisions). Fragments containing the original head (original mouth intact, generally much larger fragment) had a higher survivorship than fragments containing the original tail.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.105 | 0.005 |
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 it