MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293680818 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0273838

The application of allostasis and allostatic load in animal species: A scoping review

2022· review· en· W4293680818 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRabbits: Nutrition, Reproduction, Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAllostasisAllostatic loadMedicineBiologyGerontologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Principles of allostasis and allostatic load have been widely applied in human research to assess the impacts of chronic stress on physiological dysregulation. Over the last few decades, researchers have also applied these concepts to non-human animals. However, there is a lack of uniformity in how the concept of allostasis is described and assessed in animals. The objectives of this review were to: 1) describe the extent to which the concepts of allostasis and allostatic load are applied theoretically to animals, with a focus on which taxa and species are represented; 2) identify when direct assessments of allostasis or allostatic load are made, which species and contexts are represented, what biomarkers are used, and if an allostatic load index was constructed; and 3) detect gaps in the literature and identify areas for future research. A search was conducted using CABI, PubMed, Agricola, and BIOSIS databases, in addition to a complementary hand-search of 14 peer-reviewed journals. Search results were screened, and articles that included non-human animals, as well as the terms "allostasis" or "allostatic" in the full text, were included. A total of 572 articles met the inclusion criteria (108 reviews and 464 peer-reviewed original research). Species were represented across all taxa. A subset of 63 publications made direct assessments of allostatic load. Glucocorticoids were the most commonly used biomarker, and were the only biomarker measured in 25 publications. Only six of 63 publications (9.5%) constructed an allostatic load index, which is the preferred methodology in human research. Although concepts of allostasis and allostatic load are being applied broadly across animal species, most publications use single biomarkers that are more likely indicative of short-term rather than chronic stress. Researchers are encouraged to adopt methodologies used in human research, including the construction of species-specific allostatic load indexes.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.176 · 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