MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035903413 · doi:10.1136/vropen-2014-000056

Behavioural and faecal glucocorticoid metabolite responses of single caging in six cats over 30 days

2013· article· en· W2035903413 on OpenAlexaff
Jacklyn J. Ellis, Vicky Protopapadaki, Henrik Stryhn, Jonathan Spears, M.S. Cockram

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Record Open · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCATSAnimal scienceGlucocorticoidMetaboliteFelis catusBiologyMedicineInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The aim was to characterize the behaviour and faecal glucocorticoid metabolite (FGM) responses of six cats (Felis catus) to single caging for 30 days. DESIGN: In this observational study, changes in outcome measures were monitored with habituation to caging. Continuous focal observations of the activity, location in the cage, and posture were conducted from video recordings for one 24-hour period/week/cat. Cat-Stress-Scores were recorded daily. All faecal samples were collected for analysis of FGM. RESULTS: The percentage time spent eating increased, while percentage time spent grooming decreased, from week 1 to week 2. Cat-Stress-Score declined significantly from week 1 to week 2. FGM concentrations were significantly greater in week 1 than in week 5. A posthabituation time budget of the behaviour of the cats in the single cages showed that inactivity dominated the time budget and the cats were located on the shelf almost half of the time. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggests that a shelf was a resource of value to the cats, and that its inclusion in enclosure design is important. Quantitative and qualitative behavioural data indicated that there was an initial stress response to caging that stabilised after the first week, while FGM concentration took longer to stabilise.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations20
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary Record OpenSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207