MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200291815 · doi:10.1002/wsb.1243

Evaluation of Captive Bolt for Emergency Field Euthanasia in Canada Geese

2021· article· en· W4200291815 on OpenAlexaffabout
Karen E. Shearer, Rodney W. Brook, Christopher M. Sharp

Bibliographic record

VenueWildlife Society Bulletin · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaMinistry of Natural Resources and ForestryTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrantaWildlifeGooseMedicineBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT In rare circumstances during research or monitoring operations for wild birds, emergency euthanasia is required. However, standard methods of euthanasia may not be humane for large birds. We evaluated the use of a Dick KTBG® spring‐powered, penetrating captive bolt for the euthanasia of Canada geese ( Branta canadensis ). We conducted trials on hunter‐harvested geese to determine anatomical placement of the device and to assess skull and brain penetration effectiveness. We then assessed the device for euthanasia on anesthetized geese. Although results using dead geese suggested the device may be effective (i.e., consistent skull penetration, and trajectory depth into relevant brain structures), we found the device did not produce consistent, humane euthanasia for anesthetized geese and was not suitable for emergency field euthanasia for Canada geese. We encourage further evaluations of emergency euthanasia methods using a 2‐step process of determining placement and efficacy on dead birds and then testing on live anesthetized individuals. © 2021 The Wildlife Society.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWildlife Society BulletinSame topicVeterinary Pharmacology and AnesthesiaFrench-language works237,207