Persistent effects of incubation temperature on muscle development in larval haddock (<i>Melanogrammus aeglefinus</i>L.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Muscle development and growth were investigated in haddock larvae (Melanogrammus aeglefinus L.) incubated under controlled temperatures (4, 6, 8 degrees C) and reared post-hatch through yolk-dependent and exogenous-feeding stages in a 6 degrees C post-hatch environment. Changes in cell number and size in superficial and deep myotomes within the epaxial muscle were investigated for 28 days following hatch. Distinct and significant differences in muscle cellularity following separate developmental strategies were observed in superficial and deep myotomes. The number of superficial myofibres increased with time and, although not in a manner proportional to temperature during the first 21 days post hatch (d.p.h.), there was observed a trend during the final 7 days of greater mean cell size that was strongly associated with increased temperature. In addition, there was an apparent correspondence between increased temperature and increased size between 21 and 28 d.p.h. Among all temperature groups the superficial myotome not only demonstrated a consistent unimodal myofibre-size distribution but one that increased in range proportional to temperature. In the deep muscle, myotomes from higher incubation temperatures had a broader range of fibre sizes and greater numbers of myofibres. The onset of a proliferative event, characterized by a significant recruitment of new smaller myofibres and a bimodal distribution of cell sizes, was directly proportional to incubation temperature such that it occurred at 14 d.p.h. at 8 degrees C but not until 28 d.p.h. at 4 degrees C. The magnitude of that recruitment was also directly proportional to temperature. Following hatch, those embryos from the greatest temperature groups had the largest mean deep muscle size but, as a result of the proliferative event, had the smallest-sized cells 28 days later. The muscle developmental and growth strategy as indicated by sequential changes in cellularity and cell-size distributions between myotomes in response to temperature are also discussed in light of whole animal growth and development.
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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".