Interspecies comparison of the mechanical properties and biochemical composition of byssal threads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several bivalve species produce byssus threads to provide attachment to substrates, with mechanical properties highly variable among species. Here, we examined the distal section of byssal threads produced by a range of bivalve species (Mytilus edulis, Mytilus trossulus, Mytilus galloprovincialis, Mytilus californianus, Pinna nobilis, Perna perna, Xenostrobus securis, Brachidontes solisianus and Isognomon bicolor) collected from different nearshore environments. Morphological and mechanical properties were measured, and biochemical analyses were performed. Multivariate redundancy analyses on mechanical properties revealed that byssal threads of M. californianus, M. galloprovincialis and P. nobilis have very distinct mechanical behaviors compared to the remaining species. Extensibility, strength and force were the main variables separating these species groups, which were highest for M. californianus and lowest for P. nobilis. Furthermore, the analysis of the amino acid composition revealed that I. bicolor and P. nobilis threads are significantly different from the other species, suggesting a different underlying structural strategy. Determination of metal contents showed that the individual concentration of inorganic elements varies but that the dominant elements are conserved between species. Altogether, this bivalve species comparison suggests some molecular bases for the biomechanical characteristics of byssal fibers that may reflect phylogenetic limitations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".