COMPARISON OF THE EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF MEDETOMIDINE-KETAMINE VERSUS MEDETOMIDINE-AZAPERONE-ALFAXALONE COMBINATION IN FREE-RANGING ROCKY MOUNTAIN BIGHORN SHEEP (<i>OVIS CANADENSIS</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chemical immobilization is a key aspect of wildlife management. To minimize dose-dependent adverse effects, immobilization protocols often include two or more synergistic agents, which allows for reductions in individual drug dosages. Free-ranging bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) in Canada (n = 74) were remotely injected with a combination of medetomidine (0.16 ± 0.04 mg/kg) and ketamine (4.0 ± 1.4 mg/kg) (MK), or combination of medetomidine (0.14 ± 0.06 mg/kg), azaperone (0.21 ± 0.11 mg/kg), and alfaxalone (0.45 ± 0.21 mg/kg) (MAA). Once recumbency was achieved, arterial blood samples were collected and immediately analyzed for blood gas and acid-base status. Rectal temperature, heart rate, and respiratory rate were recorded upon recumbency and throughout anesthesia at 5–15 min intervals. At conclusion of the procedures, medetomidine was reversed by intramuscular atipamezole at five times the medetomidine dose. Induction times (mean ± standard deviation) of animals that became immobilized with one dart (8.7 ± 3.2 min, 7.3 ± 3.9 min) and recovery times of all animals (3.4 ± 1.5 min, 3.9 ± 1.6 min) were not significantly different between MK and MAA groups, respectively. Both MK and MAA groups experienced severe hypoxemia (PaO2 42 ± 9 mmHg, 40 ± 10 mmHg, respectively). PaCO2 was significantly higher (P = 0.0248) in the MK group (median 54 mmHg) than the MAA group (median 48 mmHg) with a trend towards lower pH (7.40 vs 7.42, respectively, P = 0.07). Initially, MK animals had higher heart rates than MAA animals (median 49 vs 40 beats/min), which decreased over time. In bighorn sheep, both MK and MAA produced reliable, reversible immobilization with smooth inductions and recoveries. However, less respiratory depression was seen with MAA than MK.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".