Clinical signs and treatment of cattle grazing high molybdenum forage.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Highland Valley Copper mine (HVC), near Kamloops, British Columbia, Canada, is in the process of restoring the rangeland disturbed by over 20 years of mining. Of primary concerns are the tailings ponds that can contain elevated levels of molybdenum (Mo), a residue from the copper (Cu) and Mo extraction process. This paper present the results of two studies conducted at Highmont in 1999-2001 and 2002-2004 on the effect of forages with high Mo levels on grazing cattle and whether cattle grazing is a viable option for the reclamation plan of the area. The second study was conducted to test the efficacy of Cu supplementation on the prevention of the onset of clinical signs. In summary, the trials from 1999 to 2001 showed that cattle suffered from lameness as a result of grazing forage with high molybdenum content. However, lameness was resolved in all animals by the end of trial without treatment. Results from the second grazing trials in 2002-2004 showed that with the aid of 2.5% CuSO4.5H2O supplement in loose salt, cattle could graze the site without major problems. Clinical signs were not completely eliminated in the supplemented group, probably because the supplement was free-choice. The overall results showed that 29% of the control cows exhibited primary signs of lameness whereas only 4% of the supplemented cows were affected, usually with attenuated signs. Secondary signs of diarrhoea and hair coat depigmentation were also reduced in the supplemented group. Calves were much less susceptible as only seven of the 230 calves showed clinical signs of lameness during the 6-year period. Cattle grazing might be included in the land use plan for Highmont if CuSO4.5H2O supplement is provided or if previously exposed animals that have developed a tolerance to molybdenum are used.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".