MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048100986 · doi:10.1002/jez.2400

Thermal variability during ectotherm egg incubation: A synthesis and framework

2020· review· en· W3048100986 on OpenAlexafffund
Melanie D. Massey, Jeffrey A. Hutchings

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Zoology Part A Ecological and Integrative Physiology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEctothermOviparityCompendiumIncubationBiologyEcologyZoologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural populations of ectothermic oviparous vertebrates typically experience thermal variability in their incubation environment. Yet an overwhelming number of laboratory studies incubate animals under constant thermal conditions that cannot capture natural thermal variability. Here, we systematically searched for studies that incubated eggs of ectothermic vertebrates, including both fishes and herpetofauna, under thermally variable regimes. We ultimately developed a compendium of 66 studies that used thermally variable conditions for egg incubation. In this review, we qualitatively discuss key findings from literature in the compendium, including the phenotypic effects resulting from different patterns of thermally variable incubation, as well as the ontogenetic persistence of these effects. We also describe a physiological framework for contextualizing some of these effects, based on thermal performance theory. Lastly, we highlight key gaps in our understanding of thermally variable incubation and offer suggestions for future studies.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations51
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental Zoology Part A Ecological and Integrative PhysiologySame topicPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsFrench-language works237,207