MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pharmacokinetics of florfenicol in North American elk (<i>Cervus elaphus</i>)

2004· article· en· W2154971845 on OpenAlexaff
Jane Alcorn, Patricia M. Dowling, Murray R. Woodbury, Robert Bruce Killeen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntibiotics Pharmacokinetics and Efficacy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlorfenicolPharmacokineticsCervus elaphusAnimal scienceHalf-lifeChemistryBody weightPharmacologyVeterinary medicineMedicineBiologyAntibioticsInternal medicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Florfenicol pharmacokinetics after administration of a single subcutaneous (s.c.) dose of 40 mg/kg of body weight in adult elk (Cervus elaphus) was investigated. Serum florfenicol concentrations were determined by a sensitive high-performance liquid chromatographic method with limit of quantification of 0.03 microg/mL. Florfenicol pharmacokinetic parameters in elk were estimated using a noncompartmental approach. After a single s.c. injection, florfenicol concentrations remained above 1 microg/mL for approximately 36 h and above 0.5 microg/mL for approximately 72 h. Following s.c. injection, florfenicol was absorbed rapidly with a mean maximum concentration (C(max)) of 3.7 microg/mL achieved at 4.2 h (T(max)). The C(max) value in elk is similar to values reported in cattle at the same dose, suggesting that the 40 mg/kg s.c. dose achieves therapeutic concentrations in elk. A mean elimination half-life (t(1/2)) of 44 h is shorter than that reported in cattle. The more rapid elimination half-life in elk suggests that elk may require a multiple dose regimen for therapeutic success with s.c. Nuflor. We recommend s.c. Nuflor be administered subcutaneously to elk every 24 h at a dose level of 40 mg/kg.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Pharmacology and TherapeuticsSame topicAntibiotics Pharmacokinetics and EfficacyFrench-language works237,207