Establishment of preliminary reference intervals and cytochemical staining of blood cells in big‐bellied seahorses (<i>Hippocampus abdominalis</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite their popularity, hematology reference intervals (RIs) have not been established in big-bellied seahorses (Hippocampus abdominalis). OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to establish hematologic RIs to compare values between sex in regard to cytochemical staining of blood cells. We also sought to compare white blood cell concentrations using the Natt and Herrick technique vs blood smear estimates. METHODS: Forty-three healthy individuals from the Aquarium du Québec (22 females and 21 males) were included. Normal health status was confirmed by an unremarkable physical examination in five individuals and by necropsy of five other individuals, of which all were excluded from further analyses. Venipuncture was performed from the ventral coccygeal vein in the remaining 33 individuals without anesthesia using heparinized insulin syringes. A blood volume of 0.05 to 0.1 ml was collected to prepare Wright Giemsa-stained blood smears and hematocrits immediately after venipuncture. Whole blood was stored in heparinized Eppendorf tubes to determine red and white blood cell concentrations using the Natt and Herrick technique with a hemocytometer in 10 individuals; these results were compared with blood smear estimates. Additional blood smears were stained with alkaline phosphatase substrate, periodic acid Schiff, and toluidine blue stains. RESULTS: /L). The WBC hemocytometer counts showed no correlation with blood smear estimates (Spearman's rho = 0.2). There was also no significant difference between the sexes. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary reference intervals will help assess the health of seahorses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".