Development of the retinal tapetum lucidum \n\t\t\t\t of the walleye (Stizostedion vitreum vitreum)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of the retinal tapetum \n\t\t\t\t lucidum within the cells of the retinal pigment epithelium \n\t\t\t\t (RPE) has been investigated by both light and electron \n\t\t\t\t microscopy in the walleye (Stizostedion vitreum vitreum) \n\t\t\t\t in specimens ranging in total length from 25-140 mm. In \n\t\t\t\t addition changes in the arrangement of the photoreceptors \n\t\t\t\t (both rods and cones) in both light and darkadaptation \n\t\t\t\t have also been studied. At 25 mm no \n\t\t\t\t evidence of a tapetum is present. At about 30 mm it \n\t\t\t\t makes its initial appearance as granular bodies formed \n\t\t\t\t within the apical smooth endoplasmic reticulum (SER) \n\t\t\t\t cisternae of the RPE cells in the superior temporal \n\t\t\t\t fundus. The developing tapetum then spreads \n\t\t\t\t peripherally and continues to thicken in existing areas. \n\t\t\t\t By 90 mm it is well established throughout the fundus but \n\t\t\t\t always appears better developed in the superior fundus. \n\t\t\t\t By 125-140 mm it is essentially adult in appearance. At \n\t\t\t\t 60-70 mm the rods and cones begin to form bundles \n\t\t\t\t producing macroreceptors of 20-30 photoreceptors. In \n\t\t\t\t dark-adaptation the rod bundles are retracted and have \n\t\t\t\t one or more cone cells centrally located in each bundle, \n\t\t\t\t with the bundles separated from one another by \n\t\t\t\t melanosomes. Initially when no tapetal material is \n\t\t\t\t present, post-larva1 walleye are positively phototactic \n\t\t\t\t and feed on zooplankton. In the adult condition when a \n\t\t\t\t tapetum lucidum and large macroreceptors are present, \n\t\t\t\t the walleye is negatively phototactic and feeds almost \n\t\t\t\t exclusively on larger organisms such as other fish.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".