IMMOBILIZATION OF NORTH AMERICAN PORCUPINES (ERETHIZON DORSATUM) USING KETAMINE AND XYLAZINE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We performed 345 immobilizations on 150 North American porcupines (Erethizon dorsatum) using a mixture of ketamine hydrochloride (KH) and xylazine hydrochloride (XH). A subsample of 184 immobilizations performed on 124 individuals from 4 May to 7 November 2000 and from 22 January to 30 April 2001 is thoroughly analyzed. In contrast to published procedures, we found that injecting drugs into tail muscles was more efficient than into longitudinal muscles of the lower back, because tail injections decreased the need of multiple injections by 26%. Using tail injections, we were able to reduce the dose by 50% from other published reports without significantly affecting induction, immobilization, standing, or recovery times. We suggest that injection of 5 mg KH/kg and 2 mg XH/kg in the tail as a standard procedure to immobilize North American porcupines. Body mass significantly affected the induction and standing times for single injections performed in the tail, irrespective of dose or sex. Sex, dose, and mass had no effect on the quality of immobilizations and the respiration rate of individuals during immobilization. We report a 0.87% mortality rate using a mixture of KH and XH and suggest ways to further decrease this rate.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".