MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7001075133

Indicators of individual and population health in the Vancouver island Marmot (Marmota Vancouverensis)

2018· article· en· W7001075133 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network) · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPopulationMarmotOcclusive arterial diseaseEctothermDisease
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The Vancouver Island Marmot (Marmota vancouverensis) is an endangered rodent endemic to the mountains of Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada. Following population declines in the 1980s and 1990s, an intensive captive breeding and reintroduction program was initiated involving three Canadian zoos and a purpose-built, subalpine facility on Vancouver Island.\nFrom 1997 to 2017, 660 marmots were associated with the captive program, including 63 wild-born individuals captured for breeding and 597 marmots born and weaned in captivity. Reintroductions began in 2003 and by 2017 a total of 501 marmots had been released. Although this significantly increased the wild population from its low point in 2003, conservation of the Vancouver Island Marmot (VIM) continues to involve intensive ex situ management, reintroductions, and translocations.\nHealth and disease surveillence is fundamental to the success of conservation programs like the marmot recovery project. This thesis builds upon our understanding of VIM health by describing and evaluating select health parameters, to determine baseline characteristics for VIM under its different treatments (wild, captive and captive-release) and to identify potential risk factors that may influence the health of the marmot’s population and its capacity to achieve recovery objectives. The analysis involved data that was collected between 1992 and 2016, and included 1,106 VIM blood profiles, 3,174 physical examinations, 140 post mortem examinations and 533 field mortality records.\nVIM hematology and serum biochemistry reference ranges were calculated as a baseline metric and were qualitatively comparable to published values for other\nrodent species. Leukogram and protein values were found to have potential utility as a quantitative measure for comparing VIM management groups.\nThere were significant differences in the clinical and pathological data collected from captive and free-ranging (captive-release and wild) marmots. Captives could be monitored with greater intensity and to an older age, due to increased longevity. A host of clinical and pathological disorders were described in captive marmots, including age-related, management-related, and congenital problems. There was a paucity of health conditions identified in free-ranging VIM and this could be due to a fundamental lack of disease, or limited opportunities to conduct post mortem examinations or evaluate compromised individuals in the field.\nThe analysis did not identify any specific infectious agents that represented a generalized population threat to VIM. Cardiomyopathy and neoplasia, which occurred in older individuals, were the most consequential health complications for captive marmots. Implantation of abdominal radio-transmitters was not found to impact marmot health and was important for identifying mortalities in the field. The first wild hibernation represented a time of significant mortality for VIM released from captivity. However, reintroduced marmots that survived their first year in the wild were comparable to their wild-born counterparts with respect to hibernation success and clinical presentation. Predators continued to represent a major cause of mortality for free-ranging marmots. In the absence of other identified health threats, predation and reduced hibernation success of captive-release marmots appear to be significant factors limiting the health and potential recovery of the in situ population.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,687
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,981

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0200,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,004
Tête enseignante GPT0,198
Écart entre enseignants0,194 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2018
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network)Même sujetAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesTravaux en français237 207