Micromorphology of the Oropharyngeal Cavity of the Tilapia Fish ( Oreochromis niloticus ) from Afikpo River in Eastern Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The micromorphology of the oropharyngeal cavity of the tilapia fish Orechromis niloticus, from Nigerian waters were investigated to fill the dearth of information from available literature and help understand its food prehension and pregastric apparatus biology. The lips epidermis was lined stratified squamous epithelium containing mucous cells. The lip dermal region contained dense regular collagen, melanophores and few melanocytes. Pectinate ligament was also seen in the lips. The wall of the cavity was modified into longitudinal folds lined by stratified squamous epithelium containing mucous cells. The submucosal region of the cavity wall contained loose irregular fibres, adipose tissue, blood vessels and nerve fibres. The lingual epithelium of stratified squamous cells with no taste buds makes the organ a mechanical structure involved in rolling the food back. The Pharyngeal pad was lined by stratified squamous epithelium containing mucous cells and taste buds. Pharyngeal pad teeth erupted above the epithelium. This co-localization of taste bud and teeth makes the pad the primary organ for food selection or rejection through gustation.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".