MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412726130 · doi:10.1002/zoo.70005

Reproductive Traits of Zoo‐Bred and Wild‐Bred Eastern Massasaugas ( <i>Sistrurus catenatus</i> ) at Species Survival Plan® Conservation Breeding Centres and Other Facilities

2025· article· en· W4412726130 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan D. Choquette, Trevor E. Pitcher, Corentin Fournier, Jacqueline D. Litzgus

Bibliographic record

VenueZoo Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorLaurentian UniversityToronto ZooFoothills Medical CentreWildlife Conservation Society Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of EnvironmentGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsBiologyZoologyPlan (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Species recovery efforts may require establishment of ex situ populations to supply augmentation or reintroduction projects. The Eastern Massasauga (Sistrurus catenatus) is a small rattlesnake with an ex situ breeding program maintained by a consortium of conservation breeding centres. Small population size in human care has restricted the supply of animals for in situ conservation, thus, the development of improved ex situ breeding protocols was recommended. The objectives of our retrospective study were to (1) describe and compare reproductive traits between two groups of Massasauga litters born in human care: wild-bred litters (i.e., conceived in the wild) and zoo-bred litters, (2) test for factors associated with improved reproductive output in zoo-bred litters, and, (3) make recommendations for standardizing ex situ breeding protocols. Data were collected on Massasauga birth events that occurred from 2000 to 2020 at 13 North American zoos and partner facilities. Six outcomes related to litter size and survival of offspring were compared between zoo-bred (n = 43) and wild-bred litters (n = 51). Odds ratios were used to test for correlations between nine predictor variables and four response variables in zoo-bred litters. We found higher mean litter size and number of live young per litter in wild-bred litters (12 and 10, respectively) compared to zoo-bred litters (6 and 2). Wild-bred litters more often contained live young and less often contained unfertilized ova (98% and 34% of litters, respectively) than did zoo-bred litters (58% and 81%). Experimentation on the effectiveness of alternative mating practices is warranted to improve reproductive output in human care, thereby increasing capacity to support in situ conservation.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.193 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZoo BiologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207