Milk composition in free‐ranging polar bears (<i>Ursus maritimus</i>) as a model for captive rearing milk formula
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goals of this study were to have an improved understanding of milk composition and to help create a suitable milk formula for cubs raised in captivity. Milk samples were evaluated for fat, fatty acids, carbohydrate, vitamin D(3), 25(OH)D(3), vitamin A (retinol), vitamin E (α-tocopherol), protein, and amino acids. Total lipids in milk did not differ for cubs (mean ± SEM = 26.60 ± 1.88 g/100 ml vs. yearlings 27.80 ± 2.20 g/100 ml). Milk lipids were of 23.6% saturated fatty acid for cubs and 22.4% for yearlings. Milk consumed by cubs and yearlings contained 43.8 and 42.0% mono-unsaturated fatty acids and 23.4 and 21.9% polyunsaturated fatty acids, respectively. Carbohydrate content was higher in milk for cubs (4.60 ± 0.64 g/100 ml) than for yearlings (2.60 ± 0.40 g/100 ml). Vitamin D(3) concentration of milk was 18.40 ± 5.00 ng/ml in early lactation compared with 7.60 ± 2.00 ng/ml for mid-lactation. 25(OH)D(3) was lower in milk consumed by cubs (162.00 ± 6.70 pg/ml) than in milk consumed by yearlings (205.00 ± 45.70 pg/ml). Vitamin A concentrations were 0.06 ± 0.01 and 0.03 ± 0.01 µg/ml for cubs and yearlings, respectively. Vitamin E was higher in milk consumed by cubs (20.16 ± 4.46 µg/ml) than by yearlings (7.30 ± 1.50 µg/ml). Protein content did not differ in milk available to cubs (11.40 ± 0.80 g/100 ml compared with milk for yearlings 11.80 ± 0.40 g/100 ml). Taurine was the most abundant free amino acid at 3,165.90 ± 192.90 nmol/ml (0.04% as fed basis).
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".