Data from: Fatty acid composition as a function of latitude in barnacle cyprid larvae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we investigated the fatty acid composition of the non-feeding stage of barnacle larvae (cyprids) using an integrative (larvae–environment) and comparative (latitudinal) approach. We measured fatty acids in the pelagic particulate matter and cyprids from Chthamalus bisinuatus, C. proteus, and Semibalanus balanoides from tropical to polar (Arctic) latitudes to identify potential food sources during the feeding larval stages (nauplius) that precede the cyprids and to ascertain larval capacity to integrate neutral (energetic) and polar (structural) fatty acids. Here we provide the complete dataset of all fatty acids detected both in i) the total particulate matter (TPM) present in the water column, and ii) the cyprid larvae of the different barnacle species. This could be useful in comparing data with future studies investigating fatty acid trophic markers in nearshore habitats. Raw data of biophysical paramateres includes cyprid i) size, ii) supply and (iii) settlement, as well as temperature collected using waterproof loggers (HOBO Pendant® Temperature/Light 64K). Image provided corresponds to the cyprid of the acorn barnacle Semibalanus balanoides, showcasing multiple lipid droplets, ie., the cyprid's main lipid storage organelles that store fat in the form of neutral lipids.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".