MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7070967390

Seasonal changes in nauplii and adults of Calanus hyperboreus (Copepoda) captured in sediment traps, Amundsen Gulf, Canadian Arctic

2008· article· en· W7070967390 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repository National Institute of Polar Research (National Institute of Polar Research (Japan)) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopepodArcticCalanusZooplanktonThe arcticSedimentPeriod (music)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arctic copepods were collected using time-series sediment traps in the Amundsen Gulf, Canadian Arctic, as part of the CASES (Canadian Arctic Shelf Exchange Study) program. Four sediment traps were deployed at three stations (200 m depth for CA15, 200 and 400 m depths for CA18, and 200 m depth for CA20) from October 2003 to July 2004. We collected many copepod nauplii ranging in body length from 155 to 811 μm, among which nauplii (mostly N1-2) of Calanus with a size of 〜190 μm apparently increased in abundance from February to mid-March. Mature-stage adult females (AF) of Calanus hyperboreus were collected in the traps from February to March, and adult males of C. hyperboreus appeared from November to December at all stations. The likely spawning period of these AF coincided with the occurrence period of 〜190 μm-sized nauplii. This finding suggests that these nauplii were derived from C. hyperboreus and that their breeding began at the beginning of November or December at the latest, continuing through April in the Amundsen Gulf.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score0.469

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Repository National Institute of Polar Research (National Institute of Polar Research (Japan))Same topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207