MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176063704 · doi:10.1016/j.ygcen.2021.113837

Analysis of hair steroid hormones in polar bears (Ursus maritimus) via liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry: comparison with two immunoassays and application for longitudinal monitoring in zoos

2021· article· en· W3176063704 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Hein, Katrin Baumgartner, Lorenzo von Fersen, Thea Bechshøft, Benno Woelfing, Clemens Kirschbaum, Gabriela F. Mastromonaco, Alex D. Greenwood, Ursula Siebert

Bibliographic record

VenueGeneral and Comparative Endocrinology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsToronto Zoo
FundersAalborg Zoos NaturbevaringsfondZebra Foundation for Veterinary Zoological Education
KeywordsCortisoneTestosterone (patch)EndocrinologyInternal medicineImmunoassayUrsus maritimusSteroidBiologyLiquid chromatography–mass spectrometryChromatographyTandem mass spectrometryCorticosteroneChemistryHormoneMass spectrometryMedicineImmunologyAntibodyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analysis of hair cortisol concentrations (HCCs) is a promising method for monitoring long-term stress in mammals. However, previous measurements of HCCs in polar bears (Ursus maritimus) have yielded highly variable results, which are likely due to different methodological approaches. In this study, hair samples of zoo-housed polar bears were analyzed for cortisol with two independent immunoassays [an enzyme-linked immunoassay (EIA) and a chemiluminescence assay (CLIA)] and liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS). HCC measurements depended significantly on assay type applied, sample processing (cutting vs. powdering hair) and their interaction. Best agreement was observed between LC–MS/MS and CLIA (R2 = 0.81 for powdered hair) and sample processing had a minor, albeit significant, effect on obtained HCC measurements in these assays (R2 > 0.9). EIA measurements were consistently higher than with the other assays. HCC measurement was validated biologically for CLIA and LC–MS/MS in one male polar bear that experienced considerable stress for a prolonged period of time (> 18 weeks). Subsequently, by using the validated LC–MS/MS the measurement of cortisol could be complemented by the analysis of other steroids including cortisone, testosterone and progesterone levels from hair samples collected over a 9-month period (5–13 months) from six zoo-housed polar bears (five males, one female). No seasonal steroid variation was observed except in male progesterone levels. For all steroids except cortisone, a strong body region effect (neck or paw) was observed. Cortisol and cortisone, as well as progesterone and testosterone, concentrations were positively correlated. We show that hair steroid concentrations can be used to longitudinally measure stress and reproductive hormone axes in polar bears. The data established herein provide important basic information regarding methodology and study design for assessing hair steroid hormones.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneral and Comparative EndocrinologySame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207