Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is the first report of the sipunculan Aspidosiphon (Aspidosiphon) elegans (Chamisso & Eysenhardt, 1821) in the tropical eastern Pacific. With this species the number of coral borers rises to 18 for this region. The upogebiidid crustacean Pomatogebia rugosa (Lockington, 1878) was reported previously (as Upogebia rugosa) from coral colonies in the Gulf of California, Mexico, and from coral reefs of Golfo Dulce, Costa Rica; the latter represented a southward range extension of approximately 3500 km. Subsequently, P. rugosa was recorded from branches of Pocillopora corals in Colombia, extending the range farther southward. In our study, both species were extracted from colonies of the massive coral Porites lobata Dana from Golfo Dulce, southern Pacific coast of Costa Rica. Aspidosiphon (A.) elegans ranged in length from 1 to 20 rom and was present in a density as high as 300 individuals per 1000 cm3. Pomatogebia rugosa was present in 14% of the colonies examined and was responsible for 0.6 ± 0.35% of the CaC03 removed at one site in Golfo Dulce; at another site it was present in 33% of the colonies and was responsible for 2.5 ± 2.22% of the CaC03 removed. P. rugosa was found living in pairs inside live coral colonies of Porites lobata, in branched tunnels about 2.5 mm in diameter and lined with mud. Bioerosion caused by these two species of borers in the eastern Pacific is minimal compared with that caused by sea urchins and boring bivalves.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.991 | 0.994 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".