MORPHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF HAIR OF DOMESTIC, AGRICULTURAL AND HUNTING ANIMALS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
В современных условиях значительно возросло число судебно-ветеринарных экспертиз, проводимых по факту скотокрадства, браконьерства либо незаконной торговли дикими животными. Часто в качестве материала исследования представляют волосы, отобранные на месте происшествия. В таких случаях перед экспертами ставится вопрос: «Какому виду животных принадлежит представленный на экспертизу волос?». Нередко ответить на такой вопрос весьма сложно, поскольку волосы различных млекопитающих при наличии сходных признаков в строении могут значительно отличаться у представителей одного вида при отборе их из разных областей тела. Целью работы явилось изучение морфологических особенностей волос различных видов животных и установление их таксономических признаков. Материалом исследования служили волосы, отобранные от различных видов домашних, сельскохозяйственных и охотничье-промысловых животных.Материал исследовали без предварительной фиксации. В качестве основного использован микроскопический метод исследования. Установлено, что строение волос и его отдельных структур полиморфно и у каждого вида животных имеет характерные особенности, что имеет диагностическую ценность и экспертное значение. При этом наиболее постоянными признаками в строении волос является рисунок кутикулы, расположение и соотношение коркового вещества и сердцевины. Считаем, что для наиболее оперативного проведения экспертного исследования целесообразно использовать раствор аммиака, для формирования фонда препаратов - канадский бальзам. Целесообразно формирование банка микрофотографий волос различных видов и гистологических препаратов для сравнения с исследуемым материалом. In modern conditions, the number of forensic and veterinary examinations carried out on the fact of cattle theft, poaching or illegal trade in wild animals has increased significantly. Often, hair sampled at the scene is presented as research material. In such cases, the experts are asked the question: "What species of animals does the hair submitted for examination belong to?" It is often very difficult to answer this question, since the hair of different mammals, with similar features in the structure, can differ significantly in representatives of the same species when they are selected from different areas of the body. Materials for the study was hair taken from various types of domestic, agricultural, and game animals. The material was examined without prior fixation. The microscopic research method was used as the main one. It has been established that the structure of the hair and its individual structures is polymorphic and characteristic for each species of animals, which has diagnostic value and expert value. The most constant features in the structure of hair are cuticle pattern, location and ratio of cortical substance and core. We believe that for the most efficient expert study, it is advisable to use an ammonia solution, to form a fund of drugs - Canadian balsam. It is advisable to form a bank of micrographs of hair of various types and histological preparations for comparison with the material under study.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".