Hereditary nasal parakeratosis in Labrador Retrievers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hereditary nasal dermatitis is reported in 14 Labrador Retrievers and 4 Labrador Retriever crosses. This appears to be a newly described inherited disorder for which an autosomal recessive mode of inheritance is suspected. The lesions were first noted between 6 and 12 months of age. Histopathological analysis revealed parakeratotic hyperkeratosis, often with marked multifocal accumulation of proteinaceous fluid between keratinocytes within the stratum corneum and superficial stratum spinosum. There was also a sub-basal lymphoplasmacytic infiltration within the superficial dermis. Immunohistochemistry staining for IgG (n = 4), distemper and papillomaviruses (n = 4) were negative, as were serum antinuclear antibody serology (n = 4) and fungal culture (n = 7). Electron microscopy revealed an altered cornification process: retention of nuclear chromatin, absence of lamellar bodies and marked intercellular oedema. Dogs did not respond to oral administration of zinc methionin (n = 3), cephalexin (n = 4), vitamin A alcohol (n = 1) or topical tretinoin (n = 1). Improvement of the lesions was obtained with topical vitamin E (n = 2), petroleum jelly (n = 2), and propylene glycol (n = 5).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".