MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998560937 · doi:10.2527/jas.2006-657

Genetic and phenotypic relationships of feeding behavior and temperament with performance, feed efficiency, ultrasound, and carcass merit of beef cattle1

2007· article· en· W1998560937 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsAgriculture Food and Rural DevelopmentAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSireHeritabilityAnimal scienceBiologyTemperamentResidual feed intakeBeef cattleFeed conversion ratioGenetic correlationGenetic variationGeneticsBody weightEndocrinologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feeding behavior and temperament may be useful in genetic evaluations either as indicator traits for other economically relevant traits or because the behavior traits may have a direct economic value. We determined the variation in feeding behavior and temperament of beef cattle sired by Angus, Charolais, or Hybrid bulls and evaluated their associations with performance, efficiency, and carcass merit. The behavior traits were daily feeding duration, feeding head down (HD) time, feeding frequency (FF), and flight speed (FS, as a measure of temperament). A pedigree file of 813 animals forming 28 paternal half-sib families with about 20 progeny per sire was used. Performance, feeding behavior, and efficiency records were available on 464 animals of which 381 and 302 had records on carcass merit and flight speed, respectively. Large SE reflect the number of animals used. Direct heritability estimates were 0.28 +/- 0.12 for feeding duration, 0.33 +/- 0.12 for HD, 0.38 +/- 0.13 for FF, and 0.49 +/- 0.18 for FS. Feeding duration had a weak positive genetic (r(g)) correlation with HD (r(g) = 0.25 +/- 0.32) and FS (r(g) = 0.42 +/- 0.26) but a moderate negative genetic correlation with FF (r(g) = -0.40 +/- 0.30). Feeding duration had positive phenotypic (r(p)) and genetic correlations with DMI (r(p) = 0.27; r(g) = 0.56 +/- 0.20) and residual feed intake (RFI; r(p) = 0.49; r(g) = 0.57 +/- 0.28) but was unrelated phenotypically with feed conversion ratio [FCR; which is the reciprocal of the efficiency of growth (G:F)]. Feeding duration was negatively correlated with FCR (r(g) = -0.25 +/- 0.29). Feeding frequency had a moderate to high negative genetic correlation with DMI (r(g) = -0.74 +/- 0.15), FCR (r(g) = -0.52 +/- 0.21), and RFI (r(g) = -0.77 +/- 0.21). Flight speed was negatively correlated phenotypically with DMI (r(p) = -0.35) but was unrelated phenotypically with FCR or RFI. On the other hand, FS had a weak negative genetic correlation with DMI (r(g) = -0.11 +/- 0.26), a moderate genetic correlation with FCR (r(g) = 0.40 +/- 0.26), and a negative genetic correlation with RFI (r(g) = -0.59 +/- 0.45). The results indicate that behavior traits may contribute to the variation in the efficiency of growth of beef cattle, and there are potential correlated responses to selection to improve efficiency. Feeding behavior and temperament may need to be included in the definition of beef cattle breeding goals, and approaches such as the culling of unmanageable cattle and the introduction of correct handling facilities or early life provision of appropriate experiences to improve handling will be useful.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it