Preliminary observation of mantis shrimp breeding success in captivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mantis shrimps (Crustacea: Stomatopoda) are potential aquaculture species as they are constantly fished from the wild to satisfy demands of the seafood industry. Breeding capacity of mantis shrimps in captivity is scarce and implies a gap in this area to achieve successful aquaculture practices for this species. A preliminary observation was conducted with locally obtained mantis shrimps Miyakella nepa (n=42) and Oratosquillina interrupta (n=22) to elucidate their breeding behaviour in laboratory settings. The ratio of female to male were kept to 1:1 and females kept together are either all mature or immature. Mature females were selected based on the ovary development and males from similar size group were selected to respective females for the breeding observation. The mantis shrimps were placed in either group comprising of 6 females and 6 males, 3 females and 3 males or 1 female paired to 1 male in an aquarium. The observation was conducted for 2 months and daily observation of spawning, egg brooding, mortality, moulting occurence were recorded. For M. nepa within the group breeding, a total of 2 spawning activities occurred, however all egg clutches were unfertilized. Breeding of pairs was more successful comparatively, with the fertilization rate of 66.7% (n=6) for M. nepa. More studies are needed for O. interrupta as results obtained were insufficient, with only 2 spawning and only 1 fertilized egg mass for both group and pair breeding. High mortality rate was the main cause of unsuccessful breeding within the group breeding as aggression and cannibalistic behaviour was displayed among conspecifics even though ample artificial shelters were provided in the tanks. This preliminary observation indicated that pair settings is more favourable compared to group settings for successful mantis shrimps breeding.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".