Possible Prediction of Scallop Swimming Styles from Shell and Adductor Muscle Morphology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modifications in shell structure, mantle, and adductor muscle are considered derived adaptations that allowed scallops to swim. This suggests that morphological properties of the adductor muscle and shell should relate to swimming performance in scallops. Various morphological characteristics of the shell (mass, aspect ratio, and volume between the valves) and the adductor muscle (size, position, and attachment to the shell) were measured in six scallop species (Amusium balloti, Placopecten magellanicus, Equichlamys bifrons, Pecten fumatus, Mimachlamys asperrima, and Crassadoma gigantea) with distinct swimming strategies, as documented by measurements of muscle use during induced escape responses. Morphological characteristics of the shell and adductor muscle differed markedly between the species, but did not always follow their swimming strategies. Principal components analysis revealed that shell width, shell and muscle masses, and associated morphological attributes were closely linked with swimming endurance. The intensity of the escape response was best predicted by the aspect ratio and the obliqueness of the adductor muscle.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".