MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292354243 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2022-0048

Strategy of spawning in the tropical squid <i>Lolliguncula diomedeae</i> females: allocation of energy, senescence, and influence of <i>Aggregata</i> coccidians

2022· article· en· W4292354243 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
María del Carmen Alejo-Plata‍, Miguel A. Del Río-Portilla, Adrián F. González-Acosta, S Guzmán

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCephalopods and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyReproductionAllometrySquidSenescenceZoologyMolluscaEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the squid Lolliguncula diomedeae (Hoyle, 1904) is of commercial and ecological importance in the Gulf of Tehuantepec (southeastern Mexico), this is the first study to examine female spawning strategy. Information on reproductive indicators was used to assess the impact of spawning behavior on growth rates and the condition of somatic tissue, since energy for reproduction is derived mainly from somatic tissue and consumed food. Additionally, oocyte storage patterns were examined to determine the type of spawning that characterizes this species. A total of 1347 females, ranging between 27.3 and 90.0 mm dorsal mantle length (ML) and 0.1 and 25.6 g of total weight, were examined. Statolith analysis indicates that the life cycle of L. diomedeae is 212 days. Allometric growth was observed during the female life cycle. The size at maturity was 68.54 mm ML, with synchronous ovulation (by groups) and intermittent spawning. The results showed that L. diomedeae is an energetically efficient squid species that feeds during all of its reproductive life stages, thus ensuring the occurrence of partial spawning events, and that feeding ends when senescence begins. However, its life cycle could be affected by the presence of coccidian parasites, mainly during senescence.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicCephalopods and Marine BiologyFrench-language works237,207