Microscale flow dynamics and particle capture in scleractinian corals: I. Role of the tentacles
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The size, shape, and arrangement of tentacles in scleractinian coral polyps are likely to affect particle capture yet have not been investigated in a systematic way. Morphometric measurements of tentacles of several coral species found in the Caribbean Sea were taken from macro-photographs, and from these, models were constructed in three postures: straight, upstream-facing, and downstream-facing. These models were placed in a flume to video the flow paths of particles around them. Video analysis indicates tentacles, and their specific postures, have a dramatic effect on micro-flow patterns. The expanded soft tissue tentacles, and their specific postures, greatly increase probability of particle capture by direct impaction, inertial impaction, and gravitational deposition. All tentacle postures cause increased retention time relative to freestream travel in their immediate proximity, as well as increasing both contact with the tentacle surface, and tumbling of particles. Straight and upstream-facing tentacles deflect particles downward to their base, while downstream-facing tentacles deflect particles upwards. When results from individual tentacles are considered in geometric combination, the secondary radial symmetry of the tentacular whorls in simple coral polyps appears to be an optimal strategy to filter suspended particulate material in an oscillating and omni-directional flow environment. In meandrine corals, the hedgerows of straight and curved tentacles appear to draw particles downward, retain them, and direct them onto the oral feeding areas below the thecal ridges. The size, shape, and arrangement of tentacles are thus of key importance in understanding suspension feeding in scleractinian corals.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it