Evaluating the use of the autodiametric method for estimating fecundity of Reinhardtius hippoglossoides, a species with an unusual oocyte development strategy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The autodiametric method is a highly streamlined method for estimating fecundity of fish with determinate oocyte development pattern. Greenland halibut presents a peculiar reproductive strategy with two simultaneously cohorts one of large vitellogenic oocytes (for the current year) and another one of small vitellogenic oocytes (for the subsequent year). Results of this study showed that autodiametric method can be applied to estimate fecundity in Greenland halibut. Additionally, spatial differences in the autodiametric calibration curve were observed in the Northwest Atlantic, but did not translate into differences in fecundity at length. This is the first time that spatial differences between ACCs of the same species have been reported, what could be the result of (i) the unusual oocyte development pattern, or (ii) spatial differences in oocyte biochemistry. More research on the relative dynamics of oocyte cohorts simultaneously present in Greenland halibut ovaries and the factors (endo- or exogenous) influencing oocyte packing density could provide a better understanding of observed geographical differences.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".