MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416659286 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2025-0081

Biology of feeding and digestion in the Talitroidea (Crustacea, Amphipoda)

2025· article· en· W4416659286 on OpenAlexaffvenue
David J. Wildish

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine Biology and Ecology Research
Canadian institutionsHuntsman Marine Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcotypeDigestion (alchemy)Generalist and specialist speciesSalt marshHalophytePlant species

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research on foods, feeding and digestion of talitrids are evaluated from the point of view of each of the biological subdiscipline (ecology, physiology, ethology, biochemistry, morphology and microbiology). The structure of the review follows the ecotype and generalist-specialist concepts as applied to talitrid species. Each talitrid ecotype is proposed to be associated with a preferred food class and mode of digestion. Thus, wrack generalists can digest many species of marine macroalgae or angiosperm plant litter in later stages of decomposition and switch digestive mechanisms from one to the other according to plant food availability. By comparison specialist ecotypes are more limited in feeding choices, such as psammophiles to micro- or macro-algae found on sandy beaches and palustrals to salt marsh plant litter. Of the 31 talitrid species included in this review for which the ecotype could be determined, 18 are from the North Atlantic coast and 13 from other parts of the world. Discovery of the physiological mechanisms of talitrid digestion is at an early stage of development and hypotheses are proposed to facilitate further research. Endosymbiotic bacteria resident in the hepatopancreas and ingested with decaying plant food are important in digestion of wrack generalist, palustral and xylophage talitrids.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicMarine Biology and Ecology Research→French-language works237,207→