MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313410234 · doi:10.1093/jcbiol/ruac059

The growth, respiration, and reproduction of crustaceans: a synthesis through the Gill-Oxygen Limitation Theory (GOLT)

2022· article· en· W4313410234 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Pauly, U.S. Amarasinghe, Elaine Chu, Kátia Meirelles Felizola Freire, Elsa Vázquez

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crustacean Biology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrustaceanBiologyEctothermJuvenileReproductionEcologyRespirationDecapodaZoologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Gill surface area (S) and respiration (R) in juvenile and adult crustaceans scale with their body weight (W) such that S ∝ R ∝ Wd, with d ranging mostly between 0.6 and 0.9, but always <1, as in other water-breathing ectotherms (WBE). The growth of adult crustaceans therefore approaches an asymptote, whether or not seasonal growth oscillations are explicitly considered in the model used to describe that growth (e.g., von Bertalanffy growth function). On the other hand, the variation in asymptotic size (L∞ or W∞) among crustaceans is primarily determined by water temperature, which impacts on the oxygen requirements of WBE. Through multiple examples, this and related aspects of the Gill-Oxygen Limitation Theory (GOLT), first developed for fishes and later extended to other WBE, are shown to also apply to the growth of a wide range of crustacean taxa. The GOLT also explains certain aspects of crustacean reproduction, such as the relationship between size at first maturity and maximum size, and, possibly, the feature that female crustaceans hold their eggs outside of their bodies instead of internally.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crustacean BiologySame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207