Mechanisms contributing to low domoic acid uptake by oysters feeding on Pseudo-nitzschia cells. II. Selective rejection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oysters accumulate relatively low levels of domoic acid (DA) compared to other bivalves.Mafra et al. (2009, in this Theme Section) identified feeding mechanisms of oysters that may lead to low DA accumulation during monospecific blooms of Pseudo-nitzschia multiseries.However, several different species of Pseudo-nitzschia, as well as other diatoms and flagellates, may co-occur during a bloom.Therefore, the present study investigates pre-ingestive feeding processes that operate when oysters Crassostrea virginica are exposed to mixed phytoplankton assemblages containing P. multiseries of varying cell length.Guided by video-endoscopy, material transported along the ventral and dorsal gill tracts was sampled and analyzed to determine the site for sorting of microalgae on the pallial organs.There was no preferential rejection of P. multiseries in pseudofeces when oysters were exposed to the alga in a mixed suspension with other diatom species (Thalassiosira weissflogii or Chaetoceros muelleri).In contrast, P. multiseries was preferentially rejected when mixed with the flagellates Isochrysis galbana or Rhodomonas lens, suggesting a qualitative mechanism for particle sorting.This occurred on the gills, followed by further selection on the palps.Oysters also preferentially rejected larger P. multiseries cells (82 to 90 µm) relative to smaller ones (24 to 28 µm) on the gills, while no further selection based on size occurred on the palps.This effect is attributed to the fact that P. multiseries cells with a length that exceeds the width of the principal filament aperture (ca.68 µm) are more likely directed to the ventral tract and rejected in pseudofeces.These findings offer an additional explanation for the relatively low DA levels found in oysters during natural Pseudo-nitzschia spp.blooms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".