Large mothers, but not large fathers, influence offspring number in a caridean shrimp
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationship between parental mass and female reproductive output, as well as offspring quality, was studied in the red cherry shrimp (Neocaridina davidi (Bouvier, 1904)) under controlled laboratory conditions. Adult males and females of the same age were paired combining different shrimp masses. The number of hatched juveniles from large females was higher than that from small ones, but no influence of paternal mass was detected on this variable. Both the mass of newly hatched juveniles and their growth increment during a 60-day period were similar for all parental masses. Shrimps reached sexual maturity at the end of the growth period in all treatments, and their biochemical reserves (glycogen, lipid, and protein concentrations) were not associated with maternal and paternal masses. However, lipid concentration was higher in female offspring than in male offspring. The present results show that, unlike maternal mass, paternal mass had no effect on female reproductive output and offspring quality, suggesting that the contribution of males to offspring development was adequate regardless of male size.
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 | 0.000 | 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".