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 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 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=2, NRS=3, or NRS=4; no cow was scored as NRS=5. Lameness was dichotomized twice: LAME (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.

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 score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.054
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