MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2077941538 · doi:10.3168/jds.2010-3225

Associations between cow hygiene, hock injuries, and free stall usage on US dairy farms

2010· article· en· W2077941538 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Dairy Science · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineVeterinary
ThématiqueAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Établissements canadiensUniversity of British Columbia
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHockStall (fluid mechanics)Animal scienceVeterinary medicineDairy cattleMedicineBiologyEngineering

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This cross-sectional study evaluated cow comfort measures in free stall dairies across the United States as part of the National Animal Health Monitoring System's Dairy 2007 study. The study was conducted in 17 states and evaluations were completed between March 5 and September 5, 2007. Assessors recorded hygiene and hock scores, number of cows housed in the pen, the number of cows standing with only the front feet in a stall, standing fully in a stall, and lying in a stall. Facility design measures included bedding type, bedding quantity, stall length and width, presence of a neck rail or brisket locator, and relevant distances from the rear and bed of the stall. Of the 491 operations that completed the cow comfort assessment, 297 had Holstein cows housed in free stalls and were included in this analysis. Negative binomial models were constructed to evaluate the following outcomes: the number of cows that were very dirty, had severe hock injuries, stood with front feet in the stall, stood with all feet in the stall, and were lying in the stall. Hygiene was better on farms that did not tail dock cows compared with those that did (5.7 vs. 8.8% were dirty) and on farms located in the study's west region compared with those located in the east region (5.2 vs. 9.7% were dirty). Severe hock injuries were less common on farms in the west than those in the east (0.5 vs. 4.1%). In addition, severe hock injuries were less common on farms that used dirt as a stall base or sand as bedding compared with farms that did not. A higher percentage of cows was standing with front feet in the stall at higher ambient temperatures (incidence rate ratio=1.016) and as time since feeding increased (incidence rate ratio=1.030). A lower percentage of cows were standing with front feet in the stall when the stalls were shorter and when there were fewer cows per stall. Standing fully in a stall was performed by a higher percentage of cows during the summer than during the spring (13.6 vs. 8.1%), when cows were provided free stalls with rubber mats or mattresses, and as the distance from the rear curb to neck rail increased. A higher percentage of cows were lying in a stall when sand bedding was used, when bedding was added more frequently, and during the spring months. Results of this national survey indicate that tail docking provides no benefit to cow hygiene and that stall base and bedding are key factors influencing hock injuries and stall usage on US free stall dairy farms.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,082
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,490

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,046
Tête enseignante GPT0,334
Écart entre enseignants0,289 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle