Escape manoeuvres in the spiny dogfish (<i>Squalus acanthias</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The locomotor performance of dogfish during escape responses was observed by means of high-speed video. Dogfish show C-type escape responses that are comparable with those shown previously in teleosts. Dogfish show high variability of turning rates of the anterior part of the body (head to centre of mass), i.e. with peak values from 434 to 1023 deg. s(-1). We suggest that this variability may be due to the presence of two types of escape manoeuvres, i.e. responses with high and low turning rates, as previously found in a teleost species. Fast responses (i.e. with high maximum turning rates, ranging between 766 and 1023 deg. s(-1)) showed significantly higher locomotor performance than slow responses (i.e. with low maximum turning rates, ranging between 434 and 593 deg. s(-1)) in terms of distance covered, speed and acceleration, although no differences were found in the turning radius of the centre of mass during the escape manoeuvres. The existence of two types of escape responses would have implications in terms of both neural control and muscular activation patterns. When compared with literature data for the locomotor performance of bony fishes, dogfish showed relatively low speed and acceleration, comparable turning rates and a turning radius that is in the low part of the range when compared with teleosts, indicating relatively high manoeuvrability. The locomotor performance observed in dogfish is consistent with their morphological characteristics: (1) low locomotor performance associated with low thrust developed by their relatively small posterior depth of section and (2) relatively high manoeuvrability associated with their high flexibility.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".