MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128886505 · doi:10.5539/ijb.v6n4p37

Effects of Delayed First Feeding on Larval Growth and Survival of Yesso Scallop (Patinopecten yessoensis)

2014· article· en· W2128886505 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhongqiang Cai, Xiujun Sun, Aiguo Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Biology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMarine Biology and Environmental Chemistry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPatinopecten yessoensisScallopLarvaBiologyStarvationAnimal scienceFisheryZoologyEcologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The time of first feeding is an important factor for establishing successful initial feeding in molluscan hatcheries. The effects of delayed first feeding on larval growth and survival in the larvae of Yesso Scallop Patinopecten yessoensis were investigated in this study. Groups of larvae were fed at early stage of D-shaped larvae or delayed for 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 and 144 h. When first feeding was delayed for less than 72 h, the P. yessoensis larvae grew as rapidly as those non-starved larvae. When delayed first feeding for more than 72 h, the growth rates of larvae were significantly reduced (less than 2 µm day-1), half or less than those of the non-starved group. The survival rates decreased sharply with the prolonged starvation period and the extremely low survival rates were observed in the groups that were delayed first feeding for more than 72 h. The results indicate that the prolonged starvation had a deleterious impact on the larval growth and survival when delayed first feeding for 96 h or more. To avoid mass mortality and obtain adequate growth and survival, food availability within 72 h after early D-shaped larvae is critical important for the successful initial feeding in commercial culture of this 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of BiologySame topicMarine Biology and Environmental ChemistryFrench-language works237,207