Test duration for growth, feed intake, and feed efficiency in beef cattle using the GrowSafe System1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was conducted to determine the optimum test duration and the effect of missing data on accuracy of measuring feed efficiency and its 4 related traits ADG, DMI, feed conversion ratio, and residual feed intake in beef cattle using data from 456 steers with 5,397 weekly averaged feed intakes and BW repeated measurements taken over 91 d. Data were collected using the GrowSafe System at the University of Alberta Kinsella Research Station. The changes and relative changes in phenotypic residual variances and correlations (Pearson and Spearman) among data from shortened test durations (7, 14, 21, 28, 35, 42, 49, 56, 63, 70, 77, or 84 d) and a 91-d test were used to determine the optimum test duration for the 4 traits. The traits were fitted to a mixed model with repeated measures using SAS. Test durations for ADG, DMI, feed conversion ratio, and residual feed intake could be shortened to 63, 35, 42, and 63 d, respectively, without significantly reducing the accuracy of the tests when BW was measured weekly. The accuracy of the test was not compromised when up to 30% of the records were randomly removed after the first 35 d on test. These results have valuable and practical implications for performance and feed efficiency testing in beef cattle.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".