MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011696749 · doi:10.3168/jds.2009-2951

Lying behavior as an indicator of lameness in dairy cows

2010· article· en· W2011696749 on OpenAlexaff
K. Ito, M.A.G. von Keyserlingk, S.J. LeBlanc, Daniel M. Weary

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of British Columbia
FundersU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsLamenessLyingConfidence intervalAnimal scienceLogistic regressionMedicineAnimal welfareDairy cattleOdds ratioDairy industryVeterinary medicineMathematicsBiologySurgeryInternal medicineEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lameness is widely recognized as one of the most serious welfare and production concerns in the dairy industry. Our objectives were to evaluate the associations between lying behavior and lameness, and to determine whether lying behavior can be used as a diagnostic tool for lameness. Electronic data loggers recorded lying behavior of 1,319 cows from 28 farms at 1-min intervals for 5 d. These cows were gait scored according to a 5-point Numerical Rating System (NRS), and categorized as NRS or=3) and SEVLAME (NRS=4). Data were divided into 2 groups: 11 farms using deep-bedded stalls (DB) and 17 farms using mattress stalls (MAT). Differences in the daily lying time (h/d), frequency of lying bouts (n/d), duration of lying bouts (min/bout), and the standard deviation of bout duration (min/bout) between LAME or SEVLAME cows and those that were not were tested using mixed models. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to identify behavioral thresholds to distinguish SEVLAME cows from the rest. Odds ratios for SEVLAME were estimated using logistic regression. Overall, 28.5% of cows were LAME including 7.3% that were SEVLAME. The prevalence of SEVLAME was higher on MAT farms than on DB farms (9.3+/-1.3 vs. 4.4+/-1.2%, respectively). SEVLAME cows on DB farms spent 12.8 [confidence interval (CI): 12.0 to 13.7] h/d lying down compared with 11.2 (CI: 10.7 to 11.8) h/d for cows that were not SEVLAME. These cows had longer duration of lying bouts [95.3 (CI: 84.6 to 107.3) vs. 80.3 (CI: 74.9 to 86.1) min/bout] and greater SD of bout duration [44.4 (CI: 41.1 to 48.0) vs. 50.7 (CI: 44.1 to 58.3) min/bout]. There were no behavioral differences among lameness categories on MAT farms. Within DB farms, cows with lying times >14.5 h/d had 16.2 (5.8 to 45.2) times higher odds of being SEVLAME. Cows with average lying bouts >90 min/bout were at 3.0 (1.2 to 7.4) times higher odds of being SEVLAME, and cows with average SD of bout duration >55 min/bout were at 4.1 (1.7 to 9.9) times higher odds of being SEVLAME. These results show that high lying times, long lying bouts, and variability in the duration of lying bouts were associated with lameness, and that stall surface influenced the behavioral responses of lame cows.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations264
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207