The Labrador Retriever as a Model of Naturally Occurring Myopia: Genetic and Environmental Contributions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: To validate the dog as an animal model of naturally occurring myopia by identifying genetic and environmental factors which are associated with myopia development in the Labrador Retriever. Methods: A large pedigree of Labrador Retrievers was phenotyped for refractive error. Using statistical (familial aggregation) analysis, refractive error data was used to investigate the inheritance of the trait within the pedigree. DNA samples were taken for later analysis. Potential environmental factors early in life were also studied in relation to adult refractive error; including birth weight, growth rate, season of birth, ocular pathology and litter size. DNA samples were extracted and a pilot genetic association study was designed to identify genetic loci for canine refractive error using a genome wide SNP array with a myopic case group and a non-myopic control group. Results: A significant prevalence (37%) of myopia was found within the pedigree studied. Familial aggregation analysis demonstrated a significant genetic contribution, as well as showing a strong environmental contribution. Heritability of refractive error was 0.506. Smaller litters were shown to have significantly higher levels of myopia. No association was found between any environmental factors and adult refractive error, apart from season of birth in one age tertile. A genetic pilot study was designed to test for genetic loci which contribute to canine refractive error. Conclusions: The Labrador Retriever is potentially an ideal animal model for the study of human myopia; the condition is naturally occurring in dogs, develops in a significant proportion of the population and can be phenotyped noninvasively. This study is the first to demonstrate the inheritance of myopia in any animal other than humans. The dog genome allows for myopia to be studied at a molecular level and due to the domesticated nature of the dog, breeding and environmental manipulations can also be conducted to identify further aspects of myopia causatio
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".