The relationship between feed efficiency traits and fertility in young beef bulls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Awda, B. J., Miller, S. P., Montanholi, Y. R., Vander Voort, G., Caldwell, T., Buhr, M. M. and Swanson, K. C. 2013. The relationship between feed efficiency traits and fertility in young beef bulls. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 93: 185–192. Great efforts have been taken in recent years for improving feed efficiency in beef cattle. Despite there being several studies on biological factors associated with this trait, little is known about the potential relationships between fertility and feed efficiency in beef cattle. The objective of this study was to examine the relationship between feed efficiency traits and bull fertility traits [sperm motility, viability and scrotal circumference (SC)]. From a total of 328 crossbred beef bulls that were subjected to a performance test (112 d in each of 6 yr), SC was measured and semen collected from 110 bulls using the electroejaculation method (average age±SE=417±2.5 d). Sperm were extended, cooled, and frozen in liquid nitrogen. Two residual feed intake (RFI) measures were considered with different prediction models for dry matter intake (DMI), RFI Koch included size and growth rate and RFI bkft included the additional adjustment for backfat thickness (BKFT). Sperm viability, motility and progressive motility of the 10 bulls with the greatest RFI Koch (Hi-RFI Koch ) were greater than those of the 10 bulls with the lowest RFI Koch (Lo-RFI Koch ; P<0.05, 0.01, and 0.05, respectively). Sperm motility (P<0.01), progressive motility and SC (P<0.05) of the 10 bulls with the greatest RFI bkft (Hi-RFI bkft ) were greater than those of the 10 bulls with the lowest RFI bkft (Lo-RFI bkft ). In summary, these data indicate that young beef bulls with greater feed efficiency have decreased sperm motility, sperm viability and SC, which is an undesirable effect of selection for improved feed efficiency that needs to be addressed through multiple trait selection.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".