MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7082634055 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2024-0122

Microscopic exploration of alopecia in Guadalupe fur seals from the San Benito Archipelago, Mexico

2025· article· en· W7082634055 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJuvenileFur sealEndangered speciesPopulationConservation statusHair shaft

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Until recently, there were no sightings of alopecia in pinnipeds in Mexico. However, juvenile male Guadalupe fur seals ( Arctocephalus philippii townsendii Merriam, 1897) with patchy ventral alopecia have been sighted at the San Benito Archipelago, in the Mexican Northern Pacific. Given that the species is classified as endangered and considered of priority for conservation under Mexican law and has experienced population declines exceeding 50% in certain years, exploring factors that could be indicative of health problems is relevant. We captured 13 juvenile male fur seals at West San Benito Island during 2017 and 2018 and collected skin scrapings and fur samples for routine dermatological analysis, scanning electron microscopy, and X-ray spectroscopy. Guard fur showed loss of structural integrity, medullary damage, and perforations, while damage to the underfur was less common. We found no evidence of dermatophytes or ectoparasites commonly associated with alopecia. We suggest that fur damage might be caused by nutritional or metabolic alterations secondary to an exogenous stressor, but further studies are needed to confirm this possibility. This is the first microscopic exploration of alopecia in pinniped in Mexican waters.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping→French-language works237,207→