MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2275321079 · doi:10.1163/1937240x-00002414

The effect of temperature on foraging activity and digestion in the American lobster Homarus americanus (Milne Edwards, 1837) (Decapoda: Nephropsidae) feeding on blue mussels Mytilus edulis (Linnaeus, 1758)

2016· article· en· W2275321079 on OpenAlexafffund
Guoqiang Wang, Leah M. Robertson, Iain J. McGaw, Brendan F. Wringe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crustacean Biology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHomarusBiologyBlue musselMytilusAmerican lobsterMusselDecapodaCarapaceCrustaceanFisheryCallinectesAnimal scienceSiphon (mollusc)HepatopancreasForagingEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The foraging activity and digestive processes of the American lobster Homarus americanus, feeding on blue mussels, Mytilus edulis were investigated over a temperature range of |${\rm{5 - 15}}^\circ {\rm{C}}$|⁠. Lobsters ate more food with increasing temperature, consuming maximal levels of approximately 5% of their body mass of mussel flesh in one sitting in |${\rm{15}}^\circ {\rm{C}}$| water. When foraging behaviour was observed over 7 days, lobsters were more active outside of their shelter at 10 and |${\rm{15}}^\circ {\rm{C}}$| and consumed more mussels at these two temperatures. Although lobsters were more active during the hours of darkness, they still exited shelters and fed during the light period if food was available. The lobsters consumed at least one mussel every 15.8, 7.8, and |${\rm{4.7\, h}}$| in temperatures of 5, 10, and |${\rm{15}}^\circ {\rm{C}}$|⁠, respectively. The passage of a mussel meal through the digestive system of lobsters was considerably slower compared with other decapod crustaceans. Transit rate decreased as the temperature was increased, with clearance times of 252, 133 and |${\rm{69\, h}}$| in temperatures of 5, 10, and |${\rm{15}}^\circ {\rm{C}}$|⁠. Although the time between feeding bouts decreased with increasing temperature, at the time of next feeding the amount of food that had been cleared from the foregut was the same in each temperature (approximately 20%), suggesting that this proportion of stomach emptying could be the cue for next feeding. Recent work has suggested that lobster numbers increase in the presence of mussel aquaculture operations. This work gives further insight into the feeding behaviour and activity around mussel farms, and suggests that lobsters could be an effective means of removing moribund mussels that could be lost during the harvesting process.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.246
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations19
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crustacean BiologySame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207