MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067366122 · doi:10.1002/zoo.10060

Semen characteristics of the quaker parakeet (<i>Myiopsitta monachus</i>)

2002· article· en· W2067366122 on OpenAlex
Susan J. Anderson, David M. Bird, Mark D. Hagen

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueZoo Biology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Conservation and Criminology Analyses
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemenBiologyArtificial inseminationSpermSemen qualitySemen collectionParakeetSeasonal breederAnimal scienceInseminationZoologyAnatomyBotanyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This report describes characteristics of semen samples collected from eight captive quaker parakeets ( Myiopsitta monachus ) using the massage technique. Overall, semen characteristics were (mean±SE, range in parentheses, n=8 males): ejaculate volume 1.96±0.26μl (1.02–2.96), sperm concentration 346.6±64.6 million/ml (74.8–579.3), and number of sperm per ejaculate 0.71±0.16 million (0.09–1.53). Significant differences were observed between males for all three semen characteristics. Semen pH for the eight males ranged from 8.05 to 8.5. The semen samples were collected early in the breeding season, so the data reported may not be representative of ejaculates from males in peak breeding condition. However, this study provides the first rigorous semen data from this species and demonstrates that good‐quality semen samples, suitable for artificial insemination, can be collected regularly from quaker parakeets using the massage technique. Zoo Biol 21:507–512, 2002. © 2002 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.196 · 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