MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108764122 · doi:10.1017/s0952836904005412

Maintenance of bone mass and architecture in denning black bears (<i>Ursus americanus</i>)

2004· article· en· W2108764122 on OpenAlexaff
Connor K. Pardy, Gregory R. Wohl, Philip J. Ukrainetz, Andrew Sawers, Steven K. Boyd, Ronald F. Zernicke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Zoology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Equine Medical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrsusBone mineralCancellous boneBiologyUlnaBone densityBone structureQuantitative computed tomographyInternal medicineAnatomyEndocrinologyOsteoporosisMedicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bone mass is dramatically compromised during periods of weightlessness, inactivity, or bed rest. Animals that hibernate reduce their body temperature, heart rate and metabolic activity, and likewise lower bone turnover activity during their immobile state. Black bears Ursus americanus , however, do not hibernate, but rather overwinter by denning during which they maintain a nearly normal functional heart rate, cardiac output and temperature. Furthermore, markers of bone turnover in black bears are maintained during denning periods. Thus, the purpose of this work was to determine if the denning state of relative immobility in black bears results in changes in bone mass and bone architectural structure. Harvested forelimbs (ulna and radius) were compared between pre‐ and post‐denning black bears using X‐ray imaging, dual energy X‐ray absorptiometry, and micro‐computed tomography to quantify total distal forelimb bone mineral density, cancellous bone mineral density, bone mineral content, bone volume fraction, degree of anisotropy, structure model index, and trabecular thickness. No significant differences in any of the measured parameters were found in comparing radius and ulna from autumn and spring bears in this cross‐sectional sample, suggesting that black bears did not experience a significant change in bone mass or architecture during denning. The statistical power for detecting a significant difference ( P ≤ 0.05) for this sample was 0.8. The specific mechanism by which the preservation of bone was attained may be related to skeletal muscle interaction or circulating systemic hormones.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.795
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations19
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ZoologySame topicVeterinary Equine Medical ResearchFrench-language works237,207