Inheritance of hereditary equine regional dermal asthenia in Quarter Horses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess heritability and mode of inheritance for hereditary equine regional dermal asthenia (HERDA) in Quarter Horses. ANIMALS: 1,295 horses with Quarter Horse bloodlines, including 58 horses affected with HERDA. PROCEDURE: Horses were classified as affected or unaffected or as undetermined when data were insufficient to assess phenotype. Pedigree data were analyzed to determine the probable mode of inheritance. Heritability was estimated by use of Bayesian statistical methods. RESULTS: Heritability (mean+/-SD) of HERDA was estimated to be 0.38+/-0.13, with both sexes having an equal probability of being affected. Results for evaluation of the pedigrees were consistent with a single Mendelian autosomal recessive mode of inheritance. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: HERDA in Quarter Horses is an inherited disease, and affected horses are more likely to produce affected offspring. An autosomal recessive mode of inheritance should be considered by people making breeding decisions involving Quarter Horses when a first-degree relative has been confirmed with HERDA or has produced affected offspring. In addition, breeders whose horses have produced affected offspring can reduce the likelihood of producing affected horses in the future by avoiding inbreeding.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".