MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975674046 · doi:10.1139/z04-144

Anogenital gland secretions code for sex and age in the giant panda, <i>Ailuropoda melanoleuca</i>

2004· article· en· W1975674046 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dingzhen Liu, Lixing Sun, Rongping Wei, Guiquan Zhang, Ruyong Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAiluropoda melanoleucaBiologyZoologyScent glandComposition (language)TerpenePhysiologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anogenital gland secretions play a major role in chemical communication by giant pandas, Ailuropoda melanoleuca (David, 1869). We analyzed 45 samples of anogenital gland secretions collected from 24 captive pandas (5 male adults, 6 female adults, 6 male subadults, and 7 female subadults) by gas chromatography and mass spectrometry. The secretions contained over 95 compounds. Based on 56 common compounds (relative abundances &gt;0.1%) shared by more than three individuals, we identified steroids, long-chain fatty acids, fatty-acid esters, aldehydes, alkanes, alkenes, amines, terpenes, and furans. The chemical composition of each secretion was individual-specific. Although none of these individual compounds was age- or sex-specific, the relative abundances of several compounds differed between males and females and between adults and subadults. This result shows that information about sex and age could be coded in analog form. Information about age but not gender could also be digitally coded by the presence or absence of some of the 56 compounds, in addition to the analog coding.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.764

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations88
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207