MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313068214 · doi:10.7120/09627286.21.2.167

Activity and enrichment use in disabled Asiatic black bears<i>(Ursus thibetanus)</i>rescued from bile farms

2012· article· en· W2313068214 on OpenAlex
JA Dallaire, Nicola Field, G.J. Mason

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Welfare · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForagingEnvironmental enrichmentPsychologyAnimal-assisted therapyRehabilitationAnimal welfareBiologyEcologyPet therapyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Physical disability has the potential to impede the use of environmental enrichments in rehabilitation programmes. We therefore compared the behaviour of 63 disabled and non-disabled socially housed adult Asiatic black bears rescued from bile farms for 103 observation hours. Amputees were less active than non-amputees, spent less time standing, travelled less between different areas of their outdoor enclosure, and showed less frequent stereotypic behaviour. Blind bears also showed low levels of activity and stereotypic behaviour. Blind bears and male amputees spent less time than non-disabled bears eating food dispersed throughout the enclosure as a foraging enrichment. It is unclear whether their infrequent eating is due to impaired foraging, or to lower energy demands arising from lower activity levels. Blind bears tended to manipulate feeders and other enrichment objects less than sighted bears. Disabled bears did not show any signs of impaired social interactions, and were not competitively displaced from resources by other bears more often than non-disabled bears. Thus, disabled bears rescued from bile farms show deficits in overall activity, with amputees also travelling less around their enclosures and blind bears potentially compromised in some forms of enrichment use. However, it is apparent that they adapt well to the presence of social companions. Several disabled bears also showed a degree of novel behaviour, seemingly compensating for disabilities, suggesting possible avenues for enrichments targeted specifically at these bears. The data also suggest specific hypotheses to test in longitudinal studies of rehabilitation.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.255 · 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