Bibliographic record
Abstract
Back in 2004, when The Journal of Experimental Biology was a mere 80 years old, we launched a new section revisiting classic papers from the journal that created paradigm shifts in understanding and established new fields. Over the past nine years, JEB Classics has highlighted the journal's expansive breadth: from James Gray's studies of the kinematics of eel locomotion to Bob Josephson's seminal paper on the muscle work loop, and many other topics in between, such as Donald Kennedy and Kimihisa Takeda's crayfish abdominal motor control and Dave Randall's suite of 1967 papers on in vivo blood-and-guts fish physiology. In turn, the section has gone on to become a staple of the journal's output in its own right, appearing six times each year until the final contribution, ‘A JEB classic on fish exercise’, by Tobias Wang and Hans Malte in December 2012.In addition to introducing younger scientists to the journal's impressive and diverse legacy, JEB Classics has allowed friends and colleagues of the journal to discuss much-valued treasures from the JEB archive. In addition to placing papers, some with more than half a century of influence, in a modern context, authors have also pointed out logistical and technical shortcomings – due to the antiquity of the research – that it is now possible to rectify, as well as highlighting yet-unanswered questions to inspire the next generation.Owing to the popularity of the section in print and online, we have also compiled two booklets of the earliest JEB Classics articles, covering the literature from 1923 to 1968. These booklets have proved a popular resource for students and young postdocs and we are planning a third booklet for 2013 to complete the collection.However, having made the editorial decision to define 1985 as the final year of publication when a JEB paper could truly be considered a ‘Classic’, we were faced with the dilemma of what should follow such a well-established and valued section. It was Hans Hoppeler, JEB Editor-in-Chief, who suggested that we broaden the remit to cover all of the integrative and comparative literature. So, this time, we asked the JEB community to recommend highly valued papers from the broader literature and, with over 40 recommendations from luminaries in the field, we have prepared the way for many more years of Classics to come.Launching the new section in this issue with her discussion of Homer Smith's 1929 J. Biol. Chem. paper, entitled, ‘The excretion of ammonia and urea by the gills of fish,’ Tammy Rodela from The University of British Columbia, Canada, eloquently discusses Smith's discovery that gills are the site of nitrogen excretion in freshwater fish. Of course we will be featuring other ground-breaking publications in the future, such as August Krogh's 1929 Am. J. Physiol. paper, where he defined the guiding Krogh Principle that underpins the journal's scientific ethos, and the landmark Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B issue in which Charlie Ellington laid the groundwork for all subsequent insect flight biomechanics studies.Having edited almost every JEB Classics article since its inception, I am now looking forward to discovering new classics, working with more inspiring authors and introducing the next generation of integrative biologists and comparative physiologists to the wealth of literature that lies buried in journal archives the world over.
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 | 0.006 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.184 | 0.149 |
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".