Physiological Responses of Rock Crab Cancer Irroratus Exposed to Waterborne Pollutants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the impact of waterborne xenobiotics on the rock crab Cancer irroratus. Male rock crabs were caged at two polluted sites for five weeks. One site was highly polluted while the other was slightly polluted mainly by metals. A control group was caged in a raceway tank supplied with clean sea water. The activity of branchial ATPases was increased in crabs exposed to pollution, presumably to compensate for the competition of metals with electrolytes and to facilitate the transport of metals out of the cytoplasm. The rock crab was characterized as having high basal levels of glutathione in the digestive gland (|$\sim 3500$| nmol GSH equivalents/g dry weight). Exposure to waterborne pollutants failed to trigger an increase in glutathione concentration, but over time in crabs caged at the highly polluted site it elicited a 26% increment in the relative mass of the digestive gland which is an important site for glutathione synthesis. Neither cytochrome C oxidase, nor lactate dehydrogenase activity in the merus muscle was affected by pollution. By the end of the experiment, somatic growth rate was highest in the control crabs though the crabs caged at the polluted sites also maintained a positive energy balance. Gonadal growth was delayed at the highly polluted site but the size of the gonads caught up with that of the controls by the termination of the experiment.
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".