Breed and sex differences in growth curves for two breeds of dog guides.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A desirable dog guide weighs 18 to 32 kg as an adult. Male and female German shepherd dogs and male and female Labrador retrievers were weighed between birth and 18 mo of age, with at least one weight recorded after 290 d of age. Growth curves were constructed from 10,484 observations on 880 dogs using the Gompertz function in the form Wt = W(max)exp(-e[-(t-c)/b]), where Wt is weight at time t, Wmax is mature body weight, b is proportional to duration of growth, c is age at point of inflection, and t is age in days. Estimates for mature body weight were 2.4 +/- .3 kg higher for Labrador retrievers than for German shepherd dogs and 4.7 +/- .2 kg higher for males than for females. Male Labrador retrievers were closest to the upper limit for desirable weight, with an average estimated mature weight of 31.4 +/- .3 kg. Duration of growth, 4b + c, was not different between the breeds; however, the estimate for males was 8 +/- 5d longer than for females. Female Labrador retrievers had the shortest estimate for growth of 319 +/- 6 d. The estimate for age at the point of inflection was 3.6 +/- 1.2 d greater for males than for females, but not different between breeds. A better understanding of growth curves for dog guides may aid in estimating mature weight at a young age, thus allowing earlier breeding and training decisions to be made and increasing genetic change per year.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".