MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2163740376 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2013-0295

Milk composition, milk consumption, and growth rate of a captive spotted seal (<i>Phoca largha</i>) pup from Liaodong Bay, China

2014· article· en· W2163740376 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
P.J. Zhang, Xiangrong Song, Jingye Han, L.M. Wang, Y. Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOcean Public Welfare Scientific Research Project
KeywordsBiologyLactationPhocaWeaningAnimal scienceCaptivityOffspringReproductionComposition (language)ZoologyEcologyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As lactation is commonly very brief in phocid seals, the transfer of sufficient energy between mother and offspring is critical for their reproductive success. In this study, we investigated variation in the pattern of energy transfer and allocation during lactation in the spotted seal (Phoca largha Pallas, 1811). Temporal changes in milk composition, milk consumption, and pup mass gain were analyzed from birth to weaning in a spotted seal pup that was hand-reared on a donor-female’s milk. In addition, growth rates were measured in six pups raised in captivity but nursed naturally. We found that milk fat content increased and water content decreased during lactation. We calculated that spotted seal pup ingest a mean (±SD) daily energy of 39.5 ± 8.6 MJ/day, which corresponded to a daily mass gain of 0.9 kg/day. We found that the growth rates of the hand-reared pup and the six naturally reared pups did not differ, and overall, the mean (±SD) daily growth rate of spotted seal pups was 1.1 ± 0.2 kg/day before weaning and 0.6 ± 0.2 kg/day from birth to molt. Our study provides the first data on lactation patterns in this species.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicMarine animal studies overview→French-language works237,207→