MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2177057965 · doi:10.1562/2006-05-03-ra-890

Age-Dependent Survival, Reproduction and Photorepair Activity in Daphnia magna (Straus, 1820) After Exposure to Artificial Ultraviolet Radiation

2006· article· en· W2177057965 on OpenAlexaff
Judith D. Huebner, Donna L. W. Young, Nancy L. Loadman, Vanessa J. Lentz, Murray D. Wiegand

Bibliographic record

VenuePhotochemistry and Photobiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFecundityDaphnia magnaOffspringBiologyReproductionToxicologyUltraviolet B radiationAnimal scienceUltraviolet radiationPhysiologyToxicityEcologyInternal medicineChemistryPregnancyDemographyMedicinePopulationGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined age-related vulnerability of Daphnia magna to UV-B (ultraviolet-B radiation, 280-320 nm), the age-related relationships between UV-B dosage and reproduction, and the effects of duration of PRR (photorecovery radiation) on survival and fecundity. Animals were exposed to 0, 6, 9 or 12 h UV-B (peak emission 312 nm) at 1, 2, 3 or 4 days of age and followed to 12 days. Survival decreased with increasing exposure to UV-B, but increased with age at exposure. Duration of UV-B, but not age at exposure, decreased offspring production. Survival increased with an increase in duration of PRR for animals of all ages; however, the effect was not age related. Three-day-old animals were exposed to 6 h of UV-B followed by 0-600 min of PRR. Survival was greatest in controls, lowest in the group that received no PRR and similar for all other groups. Most mortality occurred within the first 72 h postirradiation. Offspring production was highest in light controls, lowest in the UV-B-exposed group that received no PRR and not significantly different among other groups. This study demonstrates the need to consider age when examining the effects of UV-B on zooplankton and the need to monitor responses over a sufficient length of time.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.343
Threshold uncertainty score0.784

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations28
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhotochemistry and PhotobiologySame topicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton DynamicsFrench-language works237,207