MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402327465 · doi:10.1016/j.therwi.2024.100110

Evaluating the utility of harvester-collected samples for muskox (Ovibos moschatus) pregnancy diagnostics

2024· article· en· W4402327465 on OpenAlexaffabout
Olivia Hee, Mathieu Pruvot, Fabien Mavrot, Eleanor R. Dickinson, Gabriela F. Mastromonaco, Lisa‐Marie Leclerc, John E. Blake, Carla Willetto, Jan Adamczewski, Susan Kutz

Bibliographic record

VenueTheriogenology Wild · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsGovernment of Northwest TerritoriesGovernment of NunavutToronto ZooUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPregnancyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monitoring wildlife health in remote and vast regions of the Arctic can be difficult and expensive, but community-based monitoring programs can help alleviate these issues. Reliable bio-monitoring tools, compatible with sample types collected from remote regions, are needed to determine indicators of population health, such as reproductive rates. We sought to establish methods to diagnose pregnancy in muskoxen ( Ovibos moschatus) using samples that are commonly collected in harvester-based sampling programs: blood on filter paper and feces. We first evaluated three pregnancy tests, pregnancy-associated glycoproteins (PAG) on filter paper blood samples and fecal progesterone and estrogen metabolites (FPM and FEM), using 12 captive female muskoxen of known pregnancy status. Pregnancy diagnostics using PAG were highly sensitive (100 %) and specific (100 %), with a diagnostic threshold of 19.4 percent positivity (%P) relative to the positive control of the test kit. FPM and FEM diagnostic accuracy differed by hormone and time period. FPM was most accurate in mid-gestation and FEM most accurate in late gestation (sensitivities and specificities of 100 %), but both were overall less accurate than the PAG test during gestation. PAG %P followed a biphasic pattern during gestation, FPM peaked in mid-gestation, and FEM peaked in late-gestation. Following the captive trial, we applied these tests to fecal samples and blood on filter paper samples from 159 adult female muskoxen that were submitted by harvesters through community-based monitoring programs in the Canadian Arctic. The observed patterns of PAG, FPM, and FEM in wild muskoxen throughout gestation were similar to captive muskoxen, though with lower levels of the respective biomarker, requiring different diagnostic thresholds for each test. This work with captive and wild muskoxen provides guidelines for pregnancy diagnostics in muskoxen throughout gestation using samples that can be easily collected by harvesters, allowing for improved monitoring of difficult to access populations through community-based approaches.

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)0.000
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 score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheriogenology WildSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207