MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013173917 · doi:10.1111/jfb.14331

Modifying effects of a cobble substrate on thermal environments and implications for embryonic development in lake whitefish (<scp><i>Coregonus clupeaformis</i></scp>)

2020· article· en· W3013173917 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Thome, Taylor Laframboise, Charles Mitz, Eric Clancy, Jacob Bates, Christopher M. Somers, Richard G. Manzon, Joanna Y. Wilson, John M. Gunn, Douglas R. Boreham

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaMcMaster University Medical CentreNOSM UniversityMcMaster UniversityLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCobbleCoregonus clupeaformisFlumeBiologyIncubationSubstrate (aquarium)Animal scienceEcologyFisheryZoologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A laboratory flume was constructed to examine substrate effects on aquatic development. The flume was designed as a once-through system with a submerged cobble-filled corebox. Lake whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis) embryos and temperature probes were deployed at multiple sites within the cobble and in the open water channel. Embryos were incubated in the flume for two different experimental periods: one to examine substrate impacts during natural lake cooling (37 days: 5 December 2016 to 10 January 2017) and the second to investigate substrate effects while administering a twice weekly 1 h heat shock (51 days: 11 January to 2 March 2017). During incubation, no significant difference was found in the average temperature between locations; however, temperatures were more stable within the cobble. Following both incubation periods, embryos retrieved from the cobble were significantly smaller in both dry mass and body length by up to 20%. These results demonstrate differences between embryos submerged in a cobble substrate and in the open water column, highlighting the need to consider the physical influences from the incubation environment when assessing development effects as part of any scientific study or environmental assessment.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207