Association between Fur Animal Necrotizing Pyoderma in breeding farm mink (Neovison vison) and reduced fertility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The disease Fur Animal Necrotizing Pyoderma (FNP) has since 2000 been reported in many fur producing countries including Canada, Finland and Denmark. Development of FNP is characterised by rapidly forming treatment-resistant wounds on paws and in the head region. Economic losses related to FNP have been associated with mortality and decreased fur quality as well as increased veterinary costs. Also it has been suggested that FNP may be associated with reduced production results for breeding mink. The aim of this study was to evaluate if there is an association between FNP lesions in breeding animals and reduced production results based on a retrospective cohort study. RESULTS: 1465 breeding animals (244 males and 1221 females) were followed during the breeding season 2019 on five Danish mink farms. Two farms were removed from the analysis since no occurrence of FNP appeared in the observation group. After exclusion, 846 breeding animals (148 males and 698 females) remained in the analysis and were divided into two groups: exposed (EXP) or non-exposed (N-EXP) depending on the disease history of the males during mating. Females exposed to FNP positive males during breeding in average produce 14% fewer kits (P = 0.032) and these females were also more than double as likely to produce small litters (N ≥ 3) than N-EXP females. Female's from the EXP group were introduced more times to males than females in the N-EXP group (P = 0.0001, 2.5 more times in average). Females in the EXP group did not have a statistically higher risk of becoming barren (P = 0.138) though the relative risk of becoming barren was 77% higher after encountering a FNP male. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that FNP has more economic losses for the farms than direct loss of animals. Females in contact with males with FNP lesion during breeding have a higher risk of becoming barren, and produce significantly fewer kits compared to females whom haven't been in contact with a FNP positive male.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".