Effects of Wash Protocol and Contamination Level on Concentrations of Cortisol and Dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) in Swine Hair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
= 8, cortisol study 1 only) was split into two treatments (two hair samples/pig) to receive either three isopropanol or methanol washes, and two paired subsamples of hair were contaminated with feces and urine, mildly or severely. Samples were further subdivided and received one, three, or five methanol washes. Hormone concentrations were quantified from the hair and wash solvent, and the ratio of hormones in the solvent to that in the hair calculated. When grouping sow and grower hair together for analysis, hair cortisol concentrations were 13% greater after three isopropanol washes compared to methanol (22.84 ± 3.12 vs. 19.77 ± 2.64 pg/mg, respectively). When analyzing sow and grower hair separately, sow hair cortisol concentrations were 20% higher following three isopropanol washes compared to methanol washes (22.06 ± 5.21 vs. 27.72 ± 5.65 pg/mg), with no differences in grower pig hair concentrations. The solvent cortisol concentrations did not differ with wash solvent. No differences were seen for DHEA. Contamination level did not influence hormone concentrations. Hair cortisol concentrations were 24% higher after one wash compared to five washes (11.98 ± 1.47 vs. 9.05 ± 0.92 pg/mg), whereas the solvent cortisol concentrations were 80% and 84% higher after one wash compared to three and five washes, respectively (21.09 ± 4.04 vs. 4.21 ± 1.62 vs. 3.36 ± 1.32 pg/mg). The solvent-hair cortisol ratio was 65% and 73% higher following one wash compared to three and five washes (1.36 ± 0.80 vs. 0.47 ± 0.12 vs. 0.37 ± 0.14). Hair DHEA concentrations were 39% higher after one wash compared to five washes (42.39 ± 6.87 vs. 26.02 ± 5.69 pg/mg). The solvent DHEA concentrations, and the solvent-hair ratio for DHEA were 94% and 98% and 92% and 98% higher going from one wash to three and five washes, respectively (solvent: 5.07 ± 0.26 vs. 0.28 ± 0.12 vs. 0.12 ± 0.09 pg/mg and solvent-hair ratio: 0.13 ± 0.006 vs. 0.010 ± 0.004 vs. 0.003 ± 0.002). Following three methanol washes, the non-contaminated hair had 46% and 48% higher hair (17.47 ± 1.12 vs. 9.35 ± 0.80 vs. 9.05 ± 1.06 pg/mg) and a 76% and 72% higher solvent (16.31 ± 8.07 vs. 3.92 ± 0.50 vs. 4.50 ± 2.31 pg/mg) cortisol concentration compared to mild and severely contaminated hair, respectively. Wash solvent influences cortisol concentrations in swine hair, but not DHEA. Contaminated swine hair should be avoided in analyses when possible.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".