A Periphyton-Based Diet Results in an Increased Growth Rate Compared to a Detritus-Based Diet in the Invasive New Zealand Mud Snail (<i>Potamopyrgus antipodarum</i>).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The invasive New Zealand mud snail, Potamopyrgus antipodarum (Gray 1843), has been present in the Laurentian Great Lakes for at least 20 years. Recently, the snail has spread to streams that empty into Lake Ontario. In the deep waters of Lake Ontario, detritus is the common food source for the snails; while in streams periphyton becomes an important part of their diet. This experiment was designed to test the hypothesis that a diet of periphyton will lead to a higher growth rate compared to detritus. Benthic sediment was collected from 18 m depth in Lake Erie. Periphyton was grown on small rocks collected from Spring Run stream in central Pennsylvania. Eighty juvenile snails (0.6–1.0 mm in length) were placed individually into plastic cups and divided into four treatments: control snails that were fed Spirulina powder (standard lab diet), snails kept in lake sediment, snails reared on rocks with periphyton growth, and snails in a combination habitat of rock and lake sediment. After six weeks, the snails were measured again. Snails in the periphyton-only treatment had a significantly greater growth rate than snails in the remaining treatments. The other three treatments resulted in similarly low growth rates. These results suggest that the change in diet from detritus-based to periphyton-based as the snails move from a lake to a stream environment may result in higher individual and possibly population growth rates, and thus could increase their invasion success.
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 | 0.000 | 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".