Use of the shuttle box system to determine the effects of hypoxia and food deprivation on the behavioral responses of the rock crab <i>Cancer irroratus</i> Say, 1817 (Decapoda: Brachyura: Cancridae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Food-deprivation state (fed, fasted, starved) affected rock crabs physiological and biochemical responses to hypoxia in Cancer irroratus. Fasted and starved crabs were better adapted to deal with hypoxia than fed animals; however, avoidance behavior is usually considered as the first defense to environmental stressors for decapod crustaceans. We examined the effects of food deprivation on the crab’s behavior to hypoxia using the Loligo® shuttle box system, an automated system with a pair of connected water chambers with regulated flow and oxygen level. Crabs (starved, fasted and fed) that were offered a choice of two different oxygen saturations did not appear to actively avoid the hypoxia regimes tested (50% and 20% oxygen saturation). We used novel algorithms to analyze the data and found that crabs altered rheotaxis (movement towards or away from a current of water) and corresponding moving speed as a function of oxygen saturation. The food-deprivation state did influence thigmotaxis (contact with walls/objects when exploring an open space): starved crabs became bolder and more likely to explore open areas of the apparatus. Technological advancements such as the fully automated shuttle box have improved our ability to collect and analyze behavioral data; however, our study also highlighted some of the potential problems of relying solely on such apparatus to study the behavior of benthic crustaceans.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".