MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3154782657 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-374739/v1

Housing, Husbandry, and Clinical Techniques for Crayfish (Procambarus clarkii) used in Biomedical Research

2021· preprint· en· W3154782657 on OpenAlexaff
Michael B Palillo, Jack A Palillo, Mael G. Glon, Mary E. White, Willie A Bidot, Lauren M. Pintor, Valerie Bergdall, Raphael Malbrue

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institutes of HealthOhio State University
KeywordsCrayfishAnimal husbandryHemolymphBiologyProcambarus clarkiiVeterinary medicineFisheryAnimal scienceMedicineEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Crayfish (Decapoda: Astacoidea & Parastacoidea), are amongst the few animals that have stem cells within hemolymph, with the capacity to continuously produce differentiated neuronal structures throughout life. As crayfish and other invertebrates continue to become common models in research to study human disease, it is vital that we develop universal laboratory standards and guidelines on housing and husbandry practices. This publication presents introductory data on housing, husbandry, hemolymph collection and statistically supported anesthesia trials, to support future research endeavors. Evaluation of housing, husbandry, clinical and anesthetic techniques in Procambarus clarkii maintained in a biomedical research setting were performed. An option for hemolymph collection, in the area termed, the Ventral Coelomic Hemolymph Collection Zone (VCHCZ) is presented as a technique to assess hemocytes. Additionally, Wright Giemsa stained slides of crayfish hemolymph were evaluated by a board-certified veterinary clinical pathologist for interpretation and confirmation of hemolymph collection. The housing and husbandry experiments were performed over a duration of 37 days. Mortality rates and physical health assessments were performed. The following water quality parameters were concurrently evaluated: temperature, light cycle, pH, KH, GH, conductivity, total dissolved solids, salinity, ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate. Anesthetic techniques were evaluated between four experimental groups: (A) immersion in buffered MS-222 (50 mg/L), (B) immersion in buffered MS-222 (150 mg/L) (C) immersion in Propofol (65 mg/L) and (D) Propofol injection (100 mg/kg) into VCHCZ. Housing and husbandry techniques were validated with 0% mortality and normal species-specific behaviors were observed. MS-222 immersion had no observable effect on crayfish. Propofol immersion (65 mg/L) created sedative effects allowing for appropriate handling. Propofol injection (100 mg/kg) into VCHCZ successfully created a deep anesthetic plane that would allow for more invasive or surgical procedures, without adverse effects during or after recovery.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.151
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.332 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207