MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123689735 · doi:10.1017/s0952836902001115

Fatty acid profiles of yolk lipids of five species of wild ducks (Anatidae) differing in dietary preference

2002· article· en· W2123689735 on OpenAlexaff
Brian K. Speake, Gary R. Bortolotti

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Zoology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyYolkEiderAnatidaeAythyaAnasDocosahexaenoic acidArachidonic acidFatty acidPolyunsaturated fatty acidZoologyPhospholipidEcologyBiochemistryWaterfowlHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The fatty acid compositions of yolk lipids of eggs collected in the wild from five species of ducks (Anatidae) showing a range of dietary preferences, the king eider Somateria spectabilis , the lesser scaup Aythya affinis , the mallard Anas platyrhynchos , the green‐winged teal Anas crecca and the gadwall Anas streperi , are reported. For all five species, the fatty acid profiles conformed to a similar pattern, characterized by relatively balanced proportions (w/w) of arachidonic (6.7–9.1%) and docosahexaenoic (5.9–7.0%) acids in yolk phospholipid. This contrasts markedly with the yolk phospholipid of current commercially‐reared ducks where the proportion of arachidonic acid can be 10 times greater than that of docosahexaenoic acid. It was most notable that the similarities in yolk fatty acid profiles among the different species of wild ducks were achieved despite the considerable interspecies variation in dietary modes. It seems that, in this instance, genetic factors deriving from a common phylogeny may be more important than dietary differences in determining the fatty acid composition of yolk.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.797

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.173 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ZoologySame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207