Early-life enrichment in American mink (<i>Neogale vison</i>): Effects of juvenile physical enrichment on behaviour, temperament, and long-term stereotypic behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
) to combat stereotypic behaviour and behaviours or temperaments associated with poor welfare (e.g. inactivity, fear, and aggression). This enrichment is provided early in life, but it is unclear the age at which enrichment is most effective at preventing stereotypic behaviour and ameliorating welfare. Here, a group of enriched kits (EK) were provided with multiple enrichments that were periodically exchanged to renew novelty from 4-15 weeks of age, earlier than typical enrichment provision on farms, after which they were housed with a single standard enrichment into adulthood. The effects of EK enrichment on kit behaviours and long-term stereotypic behaviour were compared to that of two groups reared with a single standard enrichment (standard housed; SH and enriched at whelping; EW). Inactivity in the nest-box was decreased in EK kits as juveniles relative to other groups, however, social play was reduced and lying awake was increased compared to EW and SH juveniles, respectively. Stereotypic behaviour in the kits as adults was not prevented by EK interventions; in fact, EK kits may have developed more diverse sub-types of stereotypic behaviour than EW and SH kits. Moreover, kit temperament did not appear to be affected. EK enrichment may have been ineffective in improving welfare due to the timing of its removal or potential frustration induced by its removal. Recommendations are provided for future research regarding critical periods of enrichment to improve welfare in species such as farmed mink.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".