MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Elevated resting bunks for nursing mink dams

2012· book-chapter· en· W142641771 on OpenAlexaff
Georgia Mason, Derek B. Haley, Lauren Dawson

Bibliographic record

VenueWageningen Academic Publishers eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinkNursingEnvironmental scienceMedicinePsychologyBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A half-cylinder bunk of wire-mesh was attached to the cage ceiling of 80 dams with litters. Each bunk was 35 cm long, 16.5 cm wide and 10 cm deep, along an adult female to rest in it easily; and placement in the cage was high enough that no kits could climb on or in the bunks before the dam was removed when they were 6 weeks of age (typical weaning age in North America). 80 dams with litters acted as bunk-less controls. Behavioural data were collected daily between kit ages 21 days and weaning (42 days). Kits were weighed at weaning, and post-natal mortalities recorded from their cage records. After weaning, the teats of all dams were inspected for signs of damage or infection. Dams with bunks used them regularly. Consequently, bunk-supplemented dams rested away from their kits more than did nursing dams without bunks. However, compared to bunk-less nursing dams, nursing dams with bunks spent no less time resting with their teats accessible to their kits, and also no less time nursing (a behaviour that was observed in both nest-box and cage). Their time resting away from their kits thus represented enhanced levels of inactivity: compared to standard-housed dams, they spent about 10% more observations resting/sleeping rather than being active. Furthermore, the activity of bunk-supplemented dams also differed qualitatively: when active, bunk-supplemented dams were less likely to be stereotypic. Pacing and head-twirling was thus significantly reduced in bunk dams, both in terms of the proportion of observations devoted to this behaviour, and the proportion of their active time. Furthermore, bunk dams had improved teat health: at weaning, a significantly smaller proportion of enriched nursing females had nipples that were scored as inflamed or crusted with secretions suggestive of mastitis. Despite their mothers’ enhanced abilities to rest away from them, the kits of females with bunks did not seem to be adversely affected: along with nursing and teat availability apparently being adversely affected by the provision of bunks, kit growth rates and kit mortality rates were not significantly different between the two groups (although future research should supplement these data with variables better able to detect stress and frustration in kits). Overall, elevated resting bunks enhanced the health and welfare of dams, with no apparent major ill effects to their kits.

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)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWageningen Academic Publishers eBooksSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207