Clinical and electroretinographic characteristics of congenital stationary night blindness in the Appaloosa and the association with the leopard complex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of congenital stationary night blindness (CSNB) in Appaloosa horses in western Canada, investigate the association with the leopard complex of white spotting patterns, and further characterize the clinical and electroretinographic aspects of CSNB in the Appaloosa. ANIMALS STUDIED: Three groups of 10 Appaloosas were studied based on coat patterns suggestive of LpLp, Lplp, and lplp genotype. PROCEDURES: Neurophthalmic examination, slit-lamp biomicroscopy, indirect ophthalmoscopy, measurement of corneal diameter, streak retinoscopy, scotopic and photopic full-field and flicker ERGs and oscillatory potentials (OPs) were completed bilaterally. RESULTS: All horses in the LpLp group were affected by CSNB, while none in the Lplp or lplp groups was affected. The LpLp and Lplp groups had significantly smaller vertical and horizontal corneal diameters than the lplp group had. Median refractive error was zero for all groups. Scotopic ERGs in the LpLp (CSNB-affected) group were consistent with previous descriptions. The CSNB-affected horses had significantly longer photopic a-wave implicit times, greater a-wave amplitudes, and lower b-wave amplitudes than the Lplp and lplp (normal) groups did. No differences were present in photopic flicker amplitude or implicit times. Scotopic flickers in the CSNB-affected horses were markedly reduced in amplitude and abnormal in appearance. No differences were noted in OP implicit times; however, amplitudes of some OPs were reduced in CSNB-affected horses. There were no differences in scotopic and photopic or flicker ERGs or OPs between the normal groups. CONCLUSIONS: CSNB was present in one-third of horses studied and there was a significant association between CSNB and the inheritance of two Lp alleles. ERG abnormalities support the hypothesis that CSNB is caused by a defect in neural transmission through the rod pathway involving the inner nuclear layer.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".