A Barrier Can Reduce Competition over Teats in Pair-Housed Milk-Fed Calves
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The objectives of this study were 1) to assess whether a barrier placed between 2 teat buckets would reduce displacements at the teat buckets during milk-feeding events, 2) to determine whether the length of the barrier would influence this effect, and 3) to determine whether the quantity of milk provided to the calves would further affect competitive behavior. In both experiments, male and female Holstein calves were housed in pairs and fed milk in adjacent teat buckets. Experiment 1 included 12 pairs of calves provided with either 8 or 5 L of milk/d and compared the effect of a short barrier placed between the 2 teat buckets (B) with the effect of no barrier (C) in a crossover design with 4 periods of 10 d each. Three pairs of calves on each of the 2 milk allowances were given the treatments in the order B, C, C, B, whereas the other 3 pairs were given the treatments in the order C, B, B, C. The short barrier reduced the frequency of switches between teat buckets but did not affect the latency to initiate switching behavior. Calves provided 5 L of milk/d ingested their ration faster and had a shorter latency to initiate switching behavior, but their frequency of switching per milk-feeding event was not higher than that of calves fed 8 L. Experiment 2 examined the effect of the length of barriers placed on both sides of the teat buckets. Forty-eight calves had either long (100 cm), short (46 cm), or no barriers throughout the milk-feeding period. Three barriers (all of the same size) were placed in each pen; one was placed between the 2 teat buckets, another was placed on the right-hand side of the right bucket, and another was placed on the left-hand side of the left bucket. The long barriers doubled the latency to initiate switching behavior and greatly reduced the frequency of switching. Moreover, no calves were able to displace a calf successfully while it was consuming milk from a teat bucket when the buckets were separated by the long barriers. In conclusion, barriers between teat buckets can reduce competition for milk among pair-housed calves, but the effects were strongest when using long barriers, which separated the teat buckets as well as the front half of the calf during a feeding event.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».