Assessment of rates of deformity in wild frog populations using<i>in situ</i>cages: a case study of Leopard Frogs (<i>Rana pipiens</i>) in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High rates of deformity in wild amphibian populations from north-eastern North America have been increasingly reported since 1995. In the St Lawrence River basin (Canada) elevated frequencies of limb and eye deformities in mudpuppies (Necturus maculosus) and leopard frogs (Rana pipiens) were recorded in the early 1990s. A caging study was conducted during 1998 to verify the rates recorded in leopard frogs and pursue the potential causes of deformities seen in juveniles and adults. Week-old leopard frog tadpoles were collected from a reference wetland and maintained through to metamorphosis in cages in previously identified high risk wetlands. Deformity frequencies were measured and compared with frequencies measured in wild populations of leopard frogs inhabiting the same wetlands. The results of caging studies and sampling of wild populations were also compared with corresponding data collected from a reference wetland. No deformities were observed in caged or wild reference animals. Very low deformity frequencies (up to 2.2%) were observed in frogs caged in high risk wetlands, but greater frequencies (3.4-10%) were observed in wild young-of-the-year frogs captured at the same sites. The types of deformities were similar among groups; they included fused, missing or extra digits and disproportionate hindlimb length or eye pupil size. In addition, mortality rates were elevated in two cages in high risk wetlands. In general, the caging procedure was effective in establishing the potential for production of deformities in the waters of a given wetland, but tended to underestimate the rates calculated for samples of wild populations. The ramifications of the first-year findings for similar assessments of amphibian deformity rates and establishment of cause-effect linkages are discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".