Associations of cow-level factors, frequency of feed delivery, and standing and lying behaviour of dairy cows milked in an automatic system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deming, J. A., Bergeron, R., Leslie, K. E. and DeVries, T. J. 2013. Associations of cow-level factors, frequency of feed delivery, and standing and lying behaviour of dairy cows milked in an automatic system. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 93: 427–433. The objectives of this observational study were to quantify the standing and lying behaviour of dairy cows milked in an automatic milking system (AMS) and determine associations of this behaviour with cow-level factors (parity, stage of lactation, production, lameness) and feeding management (frequency of feed delivery). Ninety lactating Holstein cows (178±83 d in milk (DIM); parity: 2.1±1.9), kept in a free-stall barn in one of two pens, each with a free-traffic AMS, were monitored for a period of 70 d. To vary feeding management, in two consecutive 35-d periods, cows in each pen were delivered a total mixed ration (TMR), in a random order, once daily (at 0730) or twice daily (at 0730 and 1730). During the last 7 d of each period, standing and lying behaviour were recorded with data loggers, while milking information was recorded by the AMS. Cows were lameness (gait) scored twice each period. Cows lay down for 10.9±2.0 h d −1 , produced an average of 34.7±8.7 kg d −1 of milk, and milked 2.6±0.6 times per day. Cows spent more time standing after milking (P=0.04) when fed once daily compared with twice daily. Lying duration tended to increase (P=0.06) when feed was delivered twice daily. Milk yield (P<0.001) and lying bout frequency (P=0.05) were negatively associated with DIM, while lying bout length (P=0.005) and total duration of lying (P=0.01) were positively associated with DIM. Cows with higher gait scores milked less frequently (P=0.04), and spent more time lying per day (P=0.008) and tended to have more lying bouts per day (P=0.06). Overall, the results of this observational study suggest that the standing and lying behaviour of AMS-milked cows may be influenced by feed delivery frequency, but are more consistently associated with stage of lactation and lameness.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".