Effects of Pair Versus Individual Housing on the Behavior and Performance of Dairy Calves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compared the health, performance, and behavior of individually and pair-housed calves fed milk ad libitum by artificial teats. Calves were separated from their dams within 24 h of birth and assigned to housing in either a single pen (10 calves) or a group pen (10 pairs of pair-housed calves). Calves were gradually weaned at approximately 5 wk of age and remained on the experiment until wk 8. Behavior was video recorded during wk 2 to 8. Before and after weaning, calves gained weight steadily with no differences between treatments. During the week of weaning, pair-housed calves continued to gain weight normally, but the individually housed calves experienced a growth check. There were no differences between groups in the amounts of milk, starter, or hay consumed, or in the incidence of scouring. There were also no differences in the amount of time spent self-grooming, sucking on the teat, or lying down. However, pair-housed calves spent more time standing inactive, more time moving, and less time with their head out of the pen than individually housed animals. Paired calves spent approximately 2% of the day in social contact, and the incidences of agonistic behavior and cross-sucking were very low. These results indicate that housing dairy calves in pairs allows benefits such as increased space for movement and social opportunities with no disadvantages in health and weight gains.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".