Indices to estimate fat depots in American marten <i>Martes americana</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationships between fat depots and body fat content and between protein content and protein indices were examined in American marten Martes americana carcasses obtained from trappers in northeastern Ontario during the 1995/96 fur harvest season. Percent fat and percent protein did not differ significantly between sexes (t = 0.45 and 0.55, P = 0.66 and 0.58, respectively). Protein contents did not vary much among 42 individuals (range: 14–19%), and therefore we found no significant index of percent protein (0.01 < r < 0.23, P > 0.05, N = 42). In the development phase, percent fat (PFAT) was better predicted by six of the eight potential fat indices, and better predicted in females than in males (N = 17 and 18, respectively), but the omentum dry mass (ODM) performed best with both sexes (r 2 = 0.69 and 0.80 males and females, respectively). During the test phase (N = 18 males, 22 females), estimated PFAT based on ODM (per sex) did not differ from observed percent fat in either males or in females (paired t = 0.01 and 1.28; P = 0.99 and 0.22, respectively). The models slightly overestimated the number of males and females of below average condition, which indicates that the models were conservative. The accuracy of the omentum dry mass fat depot appears adequate to detect changes of physical condition in harvested marten populations. The lack of variation in protein contents 1) indicates that most animals were near average protein level, possibly due to suitable habitat conditions and 2) prevented us from finding a protein index. We encourage the development of models where conditions (e.g. temperature regime, level of disturbance, carrying capacity) may be harsher for marten.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".