PATHOLOGIC AND HEMATOLOGIC RESPONSES TO SURGICALLY IMPLANTED TRANSMITTERS IN EASTERN MASSASAUGA RATTLESNAKES (SISTRURUS CATENATUS CATENATUS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of secretive snakes, such as rattlesnakes, has benefited from the use of radiotelemetry. However, the principal assumption in telemetry studies is that the transmitter has no significant effect on the study animal. To test the validity of this assumption, the physiologic and pathologic effects of intracoelomic implants were examined in a group of 24 eastern massasauga rattlesnakes (Sistrurus catenatus catenatus) in a laboratory setting over a period of 58 wk between March 2005 and April 2006. Inflammation and infection were evaluated using gross examination, histopathology, bacteriology, hematology, and plasma protein electrophoresis. Inflammation and infection occurred despite careful surgical procedures and advanced veterinary care. Four of 12 (33%) snakes developed extensive inflammatory response to the transmitter and associated anaerobic and gram-negative bacterial infections. Another four (33%) snakes showed mild inflammatory responses without infection. Reaction to the transmitters was reflected in changes in values for heterophils, monocytes, alpha-1, and beta globulin levels. Some conclusions reached in field studies using implanted radiotransmitters in snakes may be invalid if the implant influences the behavior or survival of the subject. Advances in attachment methods and transmitter coating technology may prevent some of the adverse effects associated with surgically implanted transmitters.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".