MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2515409291 · doi:10.1080/17451000.2016.1210810

Moulting synchrony in green crabs (<i>Carcinus maenas</i>) from Prince Edward Island, Canada

2016· article· en· W2515409291 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Luke A. Poirier, Joshua Mohan, Rachael Speare, Jeff Davidson, Pedro A. Quijón, Sophie St‐Hilaire

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Biology Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersAtlantic Veterinary CollegeUniversità degli Studi di Padova
KeywordsMoultingCarapaceCarcinus maenasBiologyFisheryCrustaceanEcologyDecapodaCarcinologyLarva

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growth and spread of non-indigenous green crabs (Carcinus maenas) in Atlantic Canada is of concern to the sustainability of shellfish resources, particularly in areas recently invaded. Commercial green crab fishing has been initiated on Prince Edward Island to help control this species and provide a new resource for inshore fishermen. Developing a soft-shell crab product modelled after the Venetian ‘Moleche’ would provide an economic incentive beyond the existing hard-shell crab bait market. However, answers to questions such as the timing and characteristics of green crab moulting are required. A pilot study conducted in 2014–2015 collected seven groups of crabs and held them in individual compartments for 2–4 weeks to record moulting rates and physical characteristics. We found that a synchronized ‘moulting window’ occurs during July for male crabs. Field experiments in 2015 had an average moulting rate of 34%, with group-specific rates as high as 60%. The same cohort of crabs held in the laboratory had an average moulting rate of 48%, with group-specific rates as high as 75%. We observed a gradual increase in moulting rates from early to mid-July, after which all crabs caught had recently moulted, with evidence of new carapaces on all crabs. In 2015, the moulting window followed a 5°C increase in water temperature. Regarding morphology, the presence of a ‘halo’ on the episternites of the carapace was an indicator that a crab would soon moult. These promising results represent the first step in assessing the feasibility of a soft-shell, green crab industry.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine Biology ResearchSame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207