MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947654135 · doi:10.1670/18-048

Temperature Does Not Affect Hatch Timing in Snapping Turtles (Chelydra serpentina)

2019· article· en· W2947654135 on OpenAlexaff
Carter J. Rouleau, Melanie D. Massey, Njal Rollinson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Herpetology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurtle Biology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChelydraHatchlingBiologyOviparityHatchingEctothermEmbryoYolkEgg incubationZoologyEcologyAltricialTurtle (robot)Fishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many oviparous species rely on hatching cues to ensure hatchlings maximize their survival, given the external environmental conditions. In nature, these cues are traditionally environmental (e.g., temperature) or social (e.g., communication between embryos). Examples of both are common throughout ectothermic taxa, particularly reptiles. In the present study, we explored the role of temperature in hatch timing in Snapping Turtles (Chelydra serpentina). We allowed embryos to incubate in wild nests for the majority of embryonic development, then isolated embryos in the lab, and maintained them at 24°C until they reached Yntema stage 25. At this developmental stage, external morphological differentiation is complete and yolk resorption begins. We then incubated embryos until pipping across a range of constant but biologically relevant temperatures (20, 23, 25, 28, or 30.5°C). To test whether thermal variance acts as a hatching cue, we also included a treatment in which temperature fluctuated diurnally around a stationary mean (25 ± 4°C). We found that the timing of egg pipping was not related to temperature treatment, thermal fluctuation, or sex of the embryo. Thus, contrary to traditional understanding, temperatures in the range studied do not affect the duration of the final embryonic stage in C. serpentina embryos, and a definitive hatching cue in this species is yet unknown.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HerpetologySame topicTurtle Biology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207