MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2201926167 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2015-0358

The maternal effect of differences in egg size influence metabolic rate and hypoxia induced hatching in Atlantic salmon eggs: implications for respiratory gas exchange across the egg capsule

2015· article· en· W2201926167 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elias T. Polymeropoulos, Nicholas G. Elliott, Peter B. Frappell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHatchingBiologyAnimal scienceHypoxia (environmental)EmbryoIncubationEcologyOxygenZoologyFisheryBiochemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The maternal effect of fish egg size has profound implications for oxygen transfer across the egg shell surface, and therefore metabolism, especially under adverse environmental conditions like hypoxia. We found that metabolic rate ([Formula: see text]) of Atlantic salmon alevins was higher than of eggs in normoxia and hypoxia. Equally, the [Formula: see text] of smaller eggs from maiden spawners was lower than that of larger eggs from repeat spawners. Critical partial pressure of oxygen (PO2) for hatching was lower in eggs from repeat spawners. Generally, the PO2 within the egg capsule was lower for a given ambient PO2 and decreased further with hypoxia, and the internal PO2 was higher, the bigger the volume of the egg. Therefore, we conclude that the egg capsule poses a major barrier to oxygen exchange for the mature embryo that is more severe in eggs from maiden spawners than in eggs from repeat spawners. This was corroborated by a more advantageous egg surface area to [Formula: see text] ratio in eggs from repeat spawners. These findings challenge the “bigger is worse during incubation” hypothesis.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→