Reassessment of the life cycle of the pteropod Limacina helicina from a high resolution interannual time series in the temperate North Pacific
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Limacina helicina is the dominant pelagic gastropod mollusc species in temperate and polar ecosystems, where it contributes significantly to food webs and vertical flux. Currently, considerable uncertainty exists in the interpretation of L. helicina’s life cycle, hindering our understanding of its potential responses to environmental change. Here, we present size-frequency data on L. helicina collected from three consecutive years (2008–2010) in a North Pacific temperate fjord. Two methods of length-frequency analysis were used to infer the growth of L. helicina, i.e. linking successive means extracted from finite-mixture distributions, and using the ELEFAN software to fit seasonally oscillating versions of the von Bertalanffy growth equation to the available length-frequency data. Against a background of continuous low level spawning between spring and autumn, both approaches identified two sets of major cohorts, i.e. (i) spring cohorts (G1) spawned in March/April by (ii) overwintering cohorts (G). G overwintered with minimal to low growth, before undergoing rapid growth the following spring and completing the cycle by spawning the G1 generation and disappearing from the population by May/June. Our findings are discussed in the context of L. helicina response to climate change.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it