MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883024853 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2017-0353

Light regime affects the seasonal cycle of Antarctic krill (<i>Euphausia superba</i>): impacts on growth, feeding, lipid metabolism, and maturity

2018· article· en· W2883024853 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Flavia Höring, Mathias Teschke, Lavinia Suberg, So Kawaguchi, Bettina Meyer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEuphausiaAntarctic krillBiologyKrillDarknessMaturity (psychological)ZeitgeberCrustaceanEcologyBotanyCircadian rhythmEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Light regime is an important zeitgeber for Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba Dana, 1850), which seems to entrain an endogenous timing system that synchronizes its life cycle to the extreme light conditions in the Southern Ocean. To understand the flexibility of Antarctic krill’s seasonal cycle, we investigated its physiological and behavioural responses to different light regimes and if an endogenous timing system was involved in the regulation of these seasonal processes. We analysed growth, feeding, lipid content, and maturity in a 2-year laboratory experiment simulating the latitudinal light regimes at 52°S and 66°S and constant darkness under constant food level. Our results showed that light regime affected seasonal cycles of growth, feeding, lipid metabolism, and maturity in Antarctic krill. Seasonal patterns of growth, feeding, and maturity persisted under constant darkness, indicating the presence of an endogenous timing system. The maturity cycle showed differences in critical photoperiods according to the simulated latitudinal light regime. This suggests a flexible endogenous timing mechanism in Antarctic krill, which may determine its response to future environmental changes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicAquaculture Nutrition and GrowthFrench-language works237,207