The spatial distribution of moose (Alces Alces) incisor breakage in Atlantic Canada and an evaluation of tooth chemical composition for inferential purposes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mammalian teeth are used to obtain and consume food resources and, in some cases, for self-defence. As such, tooth quality is important for individuals to maintain body condition and meet daily nutritive requirements. This study investigates unexplained tooth breakage in the moose ( Alces alces ) populations of Atlantic Canada. By way of comparison of>5500 incisors from multiple North American moose jurisdictions, we found breakage frequency ranged from 1-6% except in Atlantic Canada (Cape Breton 6-34% and Newfoundland 24-47%). Population age structure effects were not detected. To investigate whether moose incisor elemental composition is related to high breakage in Atlantic Canada, elemental analyses and microhardness tests were performed on a subset of samples. Though tooth chemistry did not explain all of the existing variation, a negative relationship was found between Cu, Pb, Zn and breakage. Tooth microhardness did not significantly differ among regions. Other environment factors, such as density-related food resource declines, likely contribute to tooth breakage in Atlantic Canadian moose.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".