MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086961328 · doi:10.1139/z03-020

Physiological effects of immune challenge in captive greenfinches (<i>Carduelis chloris</i>)

2003· article· en· W2086961328 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Peeter Hõrak, Lauri Saks, I. Ots, Tiiu Kullissaar, Hannes Kollist, Mihkel Zilmer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEesti Teadusfondi
KeywordsBiologyImmune systemCaptivityGlobulinAntigenBasal metabolic rateZoologyPhysiologyEndocrinologyInternal medicineImmunologyAnimal science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is expected that the costs of exploiting an organism's immune system form the basis of many life-history trade-offs. However, the processes responsible for generating these costs have rarely been quantified in terms of energy expenditures and physiological rearrangements in the organism during the immune response. To determine the physiological changes caused by the immune response, we recorded various condition indices of male captive greenfinches (Carduelis chloris) 1, 4, and 8 days after immune challenge with a nonpathological antigen (sheep red blood cells; SRBC). Measured variables included estimates of total and differential leukocyte counts, serum protein concentrations and profile, serum triglyceride concentration, basal metabolic rate, body mass, spontaneous locomotory activity, and serum total antioxidant capacity. On days 4 and 8 post injection, immune-challenged greenfinches significantly reduced their spontaneous locomotory activity, which suggests a switch to energy conservation. Fourteen hours after injection of SRBC, a transient increase in serum beta-globulin concentration was recorded, indicating an acute-phase response to the antigen. None of the other condition indices was affected by the treatment, which suggests that when birds maintained on an affluent feeding regimen in captivity mounted an immune response against SRBC, they did not incur any serious physiological impact.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207