Yolked Oocyte Dynamics Support Agreement between Determinate- and Indeterminate-Method Estimates of Annual Fecundity for a Northeastern United States Population of American Shad
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reports of American shad fecundity identify two important themes regarding egg production in fishes. First, geographic variation occurs and is biologically meaningful. Shad annual fecundity decreases with increasing latitude, but predicted lifetime fecundity does not, because of a counter-gradient of survival probability, all of which can explain the adaptive significance of natal homing. Second, the appropriate method of measuring fecundity depends on the pattern of oocyte development. Historically, the relatively simple determinate-fecundity method was used; however, a recent study in a Virginia river indicates that this method may be biased, requiring the more complicated indeterminate method. We address both themes with collections from the 2015 shad spawning run in the Connecticut River, USA. Criteria for using a determinate method were satisfied for this northern population: 1) a size gap evident in the oocyte size frequency distribution, indicating group-synchronous development of yolked oocytes; 2) a decline, early in spawning, in the standing stock of yolked oocytes; and 3) low levels of atresia at the end of spawning. The determinate-method estimate of American shad annual (2015) fecundity (303,000 ± 73,400; mean ± sd) overlapped historic estimates for this and a neighboring river. The indeterminate-method estimate of annual (2015) fecundity (311,500 ± 4,500 sd) was not significantly different from the determinate-method estimate (Student's t-test, P > 0.05). In contrast, indeterminate-method estimates of annual fecundity for a Virginia population were twice as high as that measured by the determinate method in the past. This can all be explained by fundamentally different patterns of oogenesis (i.e., group synchrony versus asynchrony with respect to yolk development) at different latitudes. American shad, which is distributed within its native range from the Canadian maritimes to Florida, USA (50-30°N), may be particularly well suited to evaluate intra-specific variation in oocyte development, a relatively unexplored life history trait.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".