MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215638958 · doi:10.1111/mms.12888

Pathological and epidemiological investigation of skin lesions in belugas (<i>Delphinapterus leucas</i>) from the St. Lawrence Estuary, Quebec, Canada

2021· article· en· W3215638958 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rozenn Le Net, Sylvain Larrat, Robert Michaud, Stéphane Lair

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Mammal Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnatomyLesionPathologyMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Following the evaluation of 26,020 photographs collected from 2003 to 2014 as part of a photo‐identification program in St. Lawrence Estuary belugas, an atlas of cutaneous anomalies, composed of 18 skin lesions categories (SLCs), is proposed. At least one SLC was present in 51%, 97%, and 94% of neonates, gray, and white belugas, respectively. The most common SLC observed were “single linear fissure” (22%), “single linear scar” (19%), and “ulcer‐like lesion” (17%) in neonates, and “rake mark” (77%; 70%), “single linear fissure” (31%; 24%) and “circular depression” (40%; 35%) in gray and white belugas, respectively. Logistic regression modeling revealed significant correlations between temporal and individual variables for most SLCs. Histological evaluation of cutaneous lesions from 111 belugas stranded between 1983 and 2017 were also performed. “Single linear fissure,” “single linear scar,” “crater‐like scar,” “rake mark,” and “Morse code lesions” appear to be of traumatic origin. Results from pathological and epidemiological analyses suggest that some of these SLCs, such as “yellow patch,” “circular depression,” and “map depression” are associated with molting. Postnatal molting could account for “ulcer‐like lesions” and “single linear fissures” in neonates. Urchin spines were found within “pinhole erosions” and a gamma‐herpesvirus was detected by PCR in a wound.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.211 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine Mammal ScienceSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207