MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7086731474 · doi:10.5539/jas.v17n11p13

Review of Snakes: Society Uses, Meat Quality, Performance, and Theoretical Commercialization

2025· article· en· W7086731474 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommercializationLivestockAnimal productionPolyunsaturated fatty acidFood industryMeat packing industryProduction (economics)Red meat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Snakes have been closely associated with society for millennia, being used for many purposes including clothing, medicines and as a food source. This review examines some of the interactions of snake with society and, where applicable, compared meat quality and performance measurements with other livestock species. The review also explored the possible commercialization of snake meat as a food source in cold climates. From the information gathered, snake meat was considered moist, tough and fibrous with intense flavor and displayed color properties similar to pork and poultry. Snake meat had higher levels of leucine, isoleucine, methionine and polyunsaturated fatty acids, but lower levels of tryptophan compared to other livestock meats. In addition, snakes had solid performance measurements as evident with good metabolizable energy for maintenance and feed conversion ratios and, unexpectedly, the information reviewed showed that a theoretical production system for snake meat could be a potentially profitable industry in cold climates.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural Science→Same topicMeat and Animal Product Quality→French-language works237,207→