Cross-fostering, growth and reproductive studies in the brush-tailed rock-wallaby, Petrogale penicillata (Marsupialia : Macropodidae): efforts to accelerate breeding in a threatened marsupial species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pouch-young removal and cross-fostering trials were undertaken in the brush-tailed rock-wallaby, Petrogale penicillata, to assess whether this procedure could be used to accelerate breeding and recruitment in this threatened marsupial species. Basic reproductive data, lacking at the time of the study, were also collected. Eighteen pouch young, weighing 1–106 g, were fostered to either tammar wallaby, Macropus eugenii, or yellow-footed rock-wallaby, Petrogale xanthopus, surrogate mothers. Sixteen P. penicillata pouch young were transferred to surrogate mothers whose own young were greater or equal in size to the P. penicillata young being transferred. Fourteen of these young survived (88%). Two of the P. penicillata pouch young were transferred to surrogate mothers whose own young was smaller in size than the P. penicillata young being transferred. Neither survived. Growth curves for pouch young on mothers and surrogate mothers were estimated. P. penicillata young reared by surrogate mothers grew at a similar rate, and were weaned at a similar age, to the pouch young of the foster species. Like other rock-wallaby species, P. penicillata underwent embryonic diapause and had a gestation period of ~30 days. Permanent pouch exit occurred at ~200 days and young became sexually mature at ~23 months for males and no later than 21 months for females. This study clearly demonstrates that pouch young of P. penicillata, as small as 1 g (~8 days old), can be removed and cross-fostered successfully. These procedures can be used to accelerate breeding and recruitment by up to six times in this threatened species provided an adequate source of surrogate mothers is available.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".