Elevated pCO2 increases sperm limitation and risk of polyspermy in the red sea urchin Strongylocentrotus franciscanus
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
Corrigendum for Reuter et al. 2011, Global Change Biology17:163–171, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02216.x In our original calculation of fertilization efficiency (results in Figure 2a), sperm concentration was mistakenly entered into the model in incorrect units. This error resulted in a substantial underestimation of fertilization efficiency across all treatments, but did not change the qualitative or statistical patterns among carbon dioxide levels. The correct values for fertilization efficiency (β/β0), with lower and upper 95% confidence bounds in parentheses, are 0.401 (0.255, 0.545) for the controls, 0.111 (0.062, 0.160) at 800 ppm CO2, and 0.013 (0.006, 0.0185) at 1800 ppm CO2. The reductions in fertilization efficiency at 800 ppm and 1800 ppm CO2 were 72% and 97% relative to the control treatment (not 72% and 89%, as originally reported). The error did not affect other results (e.g., the time to polyspermy block in Figure 2b or the fertilization curves in Figure 3), and the overall conclusions of the paper remain unchanged.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it