Ultrastructure of oogenesis in two tropical oviparous Demospongiae (Porifera): <i>Cinachyrella apion</i> and <i>Tethya maza</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reproduction is a key step for propagation of any species. Consequently, gametogenesis is crucial, as it links one generation to the other. Oogenesis is influenced by different factors, but it is usually related to the quality and quantity of the food and the capacity of the female to convert these resources into egg production. In Demospongiae (Porifera), oocytes vary in several aspects (e.g., origin, size, and vitellogenic pathways). However, data on oocyte morphology is still fragmentary, and the ultrastructural organization of reproductive cells has been investigated only in a few species, mainly of viviparous sponges. Here, we aimed to comprehend the oogenesis of two tropical oviparous demosponges (Cinachyrella apion and Tethya maza) using light and electron microscopy. In both species, oocytes seemed to originate from archaeocytes. Oocytes of C. apion were surrounded by a collagenous matrix and nurse cells containing many lipid vesicles. The increase of biosynthetic organelles, concomitantly with the presence of yolk vesicle in the ooplasm, indicated that the vitellogenesis was carried out through the mixed pathway. The oocytes of T. maza were surrounded by a follicle cell membrane and nurse cells containing yolk vesicles. The absence of characteristic biosynthetic organelles in the egg of this species indicated that vitellogenesis occured through the heterosynthetic pathway. The oogenesis of C. apion is similar to other species of the genus, while the follicle membrane and nurse cells surrounding the oocytes of T. maza are not observed in any other species of Tethya. These accessory cells were considered to have a trophic role during the oogenesis of the studied species. Moreover, the presence of these accessory cells may have ecological significance, as they accelerate the egg's production through trophic support of the growing oocyte.
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".