Estimation of genetic parameters of fertility traits in Chinese Holstein cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Guo, G., Guo, X., Wang, Y., Zhang, X., Zhang, S., Li, X., Liu, L., Shi, W., Usman, T., Wang, X., Du, L. and Zhang, Q. 2014. Estimation of genetic parameters of fertility traits in Chinese Holstein cattle. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 94: 281–285. The objective of this study was to estimate genetic parameters for fertility traits in Chinese Holstein heifers and cows. Data of 20169 animals with 42106 records over a period of 10 yr (2001–2010) were collected from Sanyuan Lvhe Dairy Cattle Center in Beijing, China. Traits included age at first service (AFS), number of services (NS), days from calving to first service (CTFS), days open (DO), and calving interval (CI). Genetic parameters were estimated with multiple-trait animal model using the DMU software. Heritability estimates for AFS, NS, CTFS, DO and CI were 0.100±0.012, 0.040±0.017, 0.034±0.011, 0.053±0.019 and 0.056±0.014, respectively. Genetic correlations between traits observed ranged from −0.13 to 0.99. Genetic correlations between AFS with NS, CTFS, DO and CI were −0.31, 0.15, −0.13 and −0.15, respectively. Calving interval was strongly correlated with NS, CTFS and DO (0.49–0.99), and DO showed strong correlation with NS and CTFS (0.49 and 0.58, respectively). The genetic correlation between CTFS and NS was negative moderate (−0.25). Results were in range with previous literature estimates and can be used in Chinese Holstein genetic evaluation for fertility traits.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".