MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163790889 · doi:10.1002/zoo.21168

Brown skin disease: A syndrome of dysecdysis in puerto rican crested toads (<i>Peltophryne lemur</i>)

2014· article· en· W2163790889 on OpenAlexaffabout
Graham J. Crawshaw, Maria Pienkowski, Andrew M. Lentini, Christopher J. Dutton, Pauline Delnatte, Deanna Russell, Charlene N. Berkvens, I. Barker, Dale A. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueZoo Biology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphToronto Zoo
FundersCore Research for Evolutional Science and Technology
KeywordsLemurBiologyPuerto ricanBufoEndangered speciesHyperkeratosisZoologyChytridiomycosisEtiologyAmphibianEcologyToadPathologyPrimateEthnologyHabitatMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The endangered Puerto Rican crested toad (Peltophryne [Bufo] lemur) has been held and bred in zoos for release into protected areas in Puerto Rico since 1982. In 2004, several cases of a novel syndrome of skin changes in toads were noticed at the Toronto Zoo. A total of 21 toads were found to have similar lesions and the condition has been seen in several other groups of toads in subsequent years. Affected toads show an uncharacteristic sheen of dark-brown leathery skin, followed by recurring dysecdysis, reduced appetite, weight loss, and death from secondary causes. Histologically the condition is characterized by epithelial hyperplasia and hyperkeratosis, ulceration, and the presence of superficial mats of bacterial and fungal agents. No etiology has been identified and to date toads have not permanently responded to treatment with various pharmaceutical and nutritional therapies.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZoo BiologySame topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207