MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888868253 · doi:10.1093/jcbiol/ruy048

Use of the Brix value with cuticle indices to describe haemolymph biochemistry parameters in Homarus americanus H. Milne Edwards, 1837 (Decapoda: Malacostraca: Nephropidae)

2018· article· en· W2888868253 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrea L. Battison

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crustacean Biology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomarusBiologyAmerican lobsterCarapaceHemolymphCrustaceanMalacostracaZoologyFisheryDecapodaBroodEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Brix value was incorporated into a classification system in combination with the indices of carapace rigidity and setal stage to provide a framework for studying haemolymph biochemistry. The system was applied to a pre-existing dataset to generate descriptive statistics and reference intervals, where possible, for 18 parameters from commercial-size male and female American lobsters, Homarus americanus H. Milne Edwards, 1837, in Atlantic Canada. The lobsters were sampled on fishing vessels within 5 min of the hauling of commercial traps, providing a good representation of the range of values expected for trappable American lobster in their natural environment. In addition to expected trends in protein associated with the moult cycle, trends apparently related to reproductive status of females, region, and season were also observed in the concentrations of triglycerides, cholesterol, and lactate as well as alkaline phosphatase activity. The classification system could prove useful in other studies of crustacean physiology, especially where haemolymph-derived parameters are examined.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crustacean BiologySame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207