Trophic resources of the bivalve,
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the Chausey archipelago, growth of the burrowing bivalve Venus verrucosa (Mollusca: Veneridae) has been shown to be highly variable between closely located sites (<1 km). To explain this small-scale spatial variability, we tested the trophic hypothesis using both fatty acid markers, and carbon and nitrogen stable isotopes (δ13C and δ15N). Environmental parameters, including substrate, were also analysed to discriminate their effects on potential trophic differences. Results of isotopic fractionation and lipid profiles of water column and digestive gland samples both showed a large contribution of phytoplankton to the diet of V. verrucosa. More surprisingly, the same results suggest that Phaeophyceae and Rhodophyceae macroalgae could contribute to the nutrition of V. verrucosa as dissolved exudates. Whereas site differences were not observed between the food sources of V. verrucosa, we showed that growth performance index was correlated to wave height. Thus, we hypothesized that the high local growth variability could be controlled by the hydrosedimentary dynamics. In addition, although no significant growth differences were found between intertidal and subtidal populations, better condition index and more total lipids were found in the digestive gland of intertidal V. verrucosa, suggesting potential compensatory growth mechanisms.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".