MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7097307044

Chlorophyll a conversion and gut passage time for the pelagic

2013· article· en· W7097307044 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChlorophyll aPelagic zoneChlorophyllBayIngestionStarchRange (aeronautics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. We determined the chlorophyll (Chi) a conversion efficiency, defined as the conversion of Chi a into pheopigments and non-fluorescent products, for the cold-water appendicularian Oikopleura vanhoeffeni using M Ge as conservative tracer. In both laboratory experiments and in freshly collected animals, there was enough undegraded Chi a present in the gut to provide an index of feeding activity for individual animals. In laboratory experiments with diatoms, Chi a conversion efficiency was predictable with an average of 79%. The mean gut passage time (0.8 h) determined using corn starch and diatoms as markers was not influenced by food concentration or animal size over a trunk length range of 1.8-5 mm. When experimentally determined Chi a conversion efficiency and gut passage times were applied to O.vanhoeffeni from Logy Bay (Newfoundland), the estimated clearance rates were in close agreement with previously published values using several different techniques. We therefore suggest that the modified gut pigment technique is a useful tool to assess in situ ingestion rates of O.vanhoeffeni.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.162
Teacher spread0.156 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMarine and coastal ecosystems→French-language works237,207→