Role of Maternal Provisioning in Controlling Interpopulation Variation in Hatching Size in the Marine Snail <i>Nucella ostrina</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the role of maternal provisioning in controlling interpopulation variation in hatching size in nine isolated populations of the intertidal gastropod Nucella ostrina, in which development to the early juvenile stage takes place within an egg capsule. Variation among populations was almost entirely due to the ratio of nurse eggs to embryo, which explained 65% of the variation in hatching size. Egg size was not a significant predictor of hatching size. Differences among seven of these populations in the nurse egg/embryo ratio were entirely due to the number of nurse eggs allocated per capsule; these populations allocated different numbers of nurse eggs per capsule but allocated the same number of embryos. Intriguingly, the two most wave-sheltered populations allocated significantly more nurse eggs and more embryos to each capsule than did the seven other populations, but they maintained nurse egg/embryo ratios consistent with patterns observed in the other populations. Inter- and intrapopulation variation in hatching size appears to be controlled largely by different mechanisms: within-population variation being controlled mainly by differences in allocation of embryos per capsule, whereas most among-population variation being due to differences in allocation of nurse eggs per capsule.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".