Somatic Cell Count Distributions During Lactation Predict Clinical Mastitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research investigated somatic cell count (SCC) records during lactation, with the purpose of identifying distribution characteristics (mean and measures of variation) that were most closely associated with clinical mastitis. Three separate data sets were used, one containing quarter SCC (n = 1444) and two containing cow SCC (n = 933 and 11,825). Clinical mastitis was defined as a binary outcome, present or absent, for each lactation, and SCC were log (base 10) transformed. A generalized linear mixed model within a Bayesian framework was used for analysis. Parameters were estimated using Markov Chain Monte Carlo with Gibbs sampling. Results from the 3 data sets were similar. Increased maximum and standard deviation log SCC during lactation, rather than increased geometric mean, were the best overall indicators of clinical mastitis. Distributions of SCC were also investigated separately for different mastitis pathogens. Increased maximum log SCC was associated with clinical mastitis caused by all pathogen types. Increased standard deviation log SCC was associated with Staphylococcus aureus, and Streptococcus uberis clinical mastitis and increased coefficient of variation log SCC (standard deviation divided by mean) was associated with Escherichia coli clinical mastitis. Increased geometric mean lactation SCC was associated with an increased risk of Staph. aureus clinical mastitis but a reduced risk of E. coli clinical mastitis. Our results suggest that using measures of variation and maximum cow SCC would enhance the accuracy of predicting clinical mastitis, compared with geometric mean SCC, and therefore improve genetic programs that aim to select for clinical mastitis resistance. The results are also consistent with low SCC increasing susceptibility to some mastitis pathogens.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".