Catbirds are the New Chickens: High Sensitivity to a Dioxin-like Compound in a Wildlife Species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dioxins and dioxin-like compounds (DLCs) are highly toxic and persistent global pollutants with extremely large differences in sensitivity across taxonomic groups. The chicken has long been considered uniquely sensitive to DLCs among avian species; but DLC toxicity in nondomesticated birds is largely untested, and the relevance of the chicken as an ecological model is uncertain. New approaches that use genotyping of the AHR1 ligand binding domain to screen for DLC sensitivity among avian species predicted that the gray catbird, a relevant wildlife species, is also highly sensitive. We tested this prediction using egg injections of a dioxin-like PCB (PCB-126) and found that the catbird is at least as sensitive as the chicken to DLCs, based on both embryotoxicity and mRNA induction of phase I metabolizing enzymes (CYP1A4/5). This study is the first to confirm that there are wildlife species as sensitive as the chicken and demonstrates how using predictive genotyping methods and targeted bioassays can focus toxicity assessments on ecologically relevant 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".