MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387399175 · doi:10.61350/sbj.21.64

Descriptive anatomy of the subcutaneous air diverticula in the Northern Gannet Morus bassanus

2008· article· en· W4387399175 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre‐Yves Daoust, Greg Dobbin, R Ridlington Abbott, Sierra Dawson

Bibliographic record

VenueSeabird Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnatomyDissection (medical)CushioningGeologySubcutaneous fatMedicineTrunkBiologyMaterials scienceAdipose tissue

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Northern Gannets Morus bassanus typically forage by diving from high above the water surface. Their subcutaneous (s-c) tissues are invested by an elaborate system of air diverticula that presumably function in cushioning the impact of their entry into the water. The anatomical details of this system were studied by dissection and latex injection in 15 carcasses of these birds. The s-c air diverticula consist mainly of two independent systems of intercommunicating compartments that are bilaterally symmetrical, cover the ventral and lateral regions of the trunk and the proximal portions of the wings and legs, and communicate with the ipsilateral region of the clavicular respiratory air sac. This communication, which opens into the axillary region, is through a narrow gap between the subcoracoideus and coracobrachialis caudalis muscles. Two other, smaller, independent systems of s-c air diverticula, also bilaterally symmetrical, may contribute to cushioning the Northern Gannet’s body during its dives: one at the thoracic inlet, which communicates with the corresponding side of the clavicular air sac, and the other along the neck, which communicates with the nasal cavities and the choanal opening. Further work is required to define more precisely the function of these extensive air diverticula and air circulation within them.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeabird Journal→Same topicAvian ecology and behavior→French-language works237,207→