Morphological differentiation in introduced pumpkinseed<i>Lepomis gibbosus</i>(L.) occupying different habitat zones in Portuguese reservoirs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduced pumpkinseedLepomis gibbosussampled from four habitat zones (fluvial pelagic, fluvial littoral, lacustrine pelagic and lacustrine littoral) in three Portuguese reservoirs were used to test the hypotheses that habitats with the least similar characteristics will show the most differentiation, and that morphological differences will relate to functional adaptations to flow and trophic habitats. Results from discriminant function analysis and ANCOVA showed that there were significant differences in external morphology in pumpkinseed captured from the four habitat zones in all three reservoirs. Littoral and pelagic differentiation was stronger than fluvial and lacustrine differentiation in all of the reservoirs, and the most significant variable that differentiated pumpkinseed from the littoral and pelagic habitats was body depth. The illustration of external morphological differentiation in pumpkinseed along both habitat dimensions demonstrates the high degree of morphological plasticity of this introduced species.
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".