Developmental mode in benthic opisthobranch molluscs from the northeast Pacific Ocean: feeding in a sea of plenty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mode of development was determined for 130 of the nearly 250 species of shallow-water, benthic opisthobranchs known from the northeast Pacific Ocean. Excluding four introduced or cryptogenic species, 91% of the species have planktotrophic development, 5% have lecithotrophic development, and 5% have direct development. Of the 12 native species with non-feeding (i.e., lecithotrophic or direct) modes of development, 5 occur largely or entirely south of Point Conception, California, where surface waters are warmer, lower in nutrients, and less productive than those to the north; 4 are known from habitats, mainly estuaries, that are small and sparsely distributed along the Pacific coast of North America; and 1 is Arctic and circumboreal in distribution. The nudibranchs Doto amyra Marcus, 1961 and Phidiana hiltoni (O'Donoghue, 1927) were the only species with non-feeding development that were widespread along the outer coast. This pattern of distribution of developmental mode is consistent with the prediction that planktotrophy should be maintained at high prevalence in regions safe for larval feeding and growth and should tend to be selected against where the risks of larval mortality (from low- or poor-quality food, predation, and transport away from favorable adult habitat) are higher. However, direct development, which includes the most derived mode of non-feeding development, was also correlated with small adult size, reflecting an association common in marine invertebrates. Planktotrophic development also predominates in decapod Crustacea from the northeast Pacific, but is less common in echinoderms and prosobranch gastropods from this region owing to the presence of lineages constrained by phylogeny to non-feeding modes of development.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".