Review: Feeding behaviour of dairy cattle: Meaures and applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is growing scientific interest in feeding behaviour of dairy cattle, in part because dairy nutritionists are now becoming interested in how changes in feed intake are mediated by changes in behaviour and, in part, because changes in feeding behaviour are increasingly recognized as useful indicator of cow health. In this review we describe key methodological approaches to the study of feeding behaviour in dairy cattle. We also review empirical work addressing how changes in management and housing can affect this behaviour. We show how cows divide their daily intake into several discrete feeding events made up of a number of visits or “meals” that are separated by longer periods with little feeding activity. Feeding behaviour can be described using several measures, including the number and duration of meals, as well as intake and feeding rate. Feeding behaviour within a group of intensively managed cows is often highly synchronized, similar to that seen in extensively housed cattle, with delivery of fresh feed appearing to be the primary factor stimulating feeding by housed dairy cows. Competition at the feed bunk can affect feeding behaviour, increasing the feeding rate and reducing intake, especially for subordinate animals. We also review empirical work showing that feed intake, feeding times, and feeding rate are altered when cows are ill. Feeding behaviour changes in the days before calving, and these changes are greatest among cows at greatest risk of succumbing to disease in the early post partum period. These results suggest that monitoring changes in feeding behaviour may be useful in early detection and prevention of disease in transition cows.Key words: Dairy cattle, feeding behaviour, management, health
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".