Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although dark coat color in dogs has been theorized as a risk factor for thermal stress, there is little evidence in the scientific literature to support that position. We utilized 16 non-conditioned Labradors (8 black and 8 yellow) in a three-phase test to examine effects of coat color on thermal status of the dog. Rectal, gastrointestinal (GI), surface temperature, and respiration rates measured in breaths per minute (bpm), were collected prior to (Baseline – phase 1) and immediately after a controlled 30-minute walk in an open air environment on a sunny day (Sunlight – phase 2). Follow up measurements were taken 15 minutes after walking (Cool down – phase 3) to determine post-exposure return to baseline. No effect of coat color was measured for rectal, gastrointestinal, surface temperature, or respiration (P > 0.05) in dogs following their 30-minute walk. Temperatures increased similarly across both coat colors (rectal 1.88 °C and 1.83 °C; GI 1.89 °C and 1.94 °C) for black and yellow dogs respectively during the sunlight phase (P > 0.05). All temperatures and respiration rates decreased similarly across coat colors for rectal (0.9°C and 1.0 °C) GI (1.5 °C and 1.3°C) for black and yellow dogs respectively (P>0.05). Similarly, sex did not impact thermal status across rectal, gastrointestinal, surface temperature or respiration rates measured (P > 0.05). These data contradict the commonly held theory that dogs with darker coat color may experience a greater thermal change when compared to dogs with a lighter coat color exposed to direct sunlight.
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".