Growth And Metabolism In The Embryonic White-spotted Bamboo Shark, Chiloscyllium Plagiosum: Comparison With Embryonic Birds And Reptiles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Birds and reptiles have been important models for studying the energetics of embryonic development. Studies on these groups reveal three metabolic patterns: an exponential increase in metabolism with embryo age, a sigmoidal increase with age, or a sigmoidal increase followed by a decrease before hatching. Models developed to explain avian metabolic patterns and developmental costs partition total costs between growth and maintenance. To test the generality of these models, we examined embryonic energetics of the oviparous white-spotted bamboo shark Chiloscyllium plagiosum. Oviparous sharks must actively ventilate during development, which could increase their development costs relative to birds and reptiles. Our results demonstrated that bamboo shark embryos have a peaked metabolic pattern and sigmoidal increase in body mass similar to ratites, crocodilians, and some turtles. The total cost of development was higher in bamboo sharks than in reptiles and many birds. However, calculations reveal that the high cost of bamboo shark development can be explained by the relatively long incubation time rather than the additional cost of muscular movement. Finally, an avian model can reasonably describe shark embryonic metabolism, suggesting that movement costs do not significantly alter the metabolic pattern during development.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".