MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Teat Anatomy and its Relationship with Quarter and Udder Milk Flow Characteristics in Dairy Cows

2004· article· en· W2016863680 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. Weinfurtner, R.M. Bruckmaier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy Cows
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilkingUdderAnimal scienceQuarter (Canadian coin)MathematicsAnatomyVeterinary medicineBiologyMedicineMastitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anatomical and functional characteristics of the teat are supposed to have considerable influence on milk flow performance. In the present study, various teat and milking characteristics in 148 quarters of 38 cows were analyzed via 3 different approaches. Teat canal length, teat wall thickness, and teat diameter were measured by ultrasound. In addition, the vacuum needed to open the teat canal (VO) was determined and milk flow profiles were measured in each quarter separately. Rear teats were shorter and thicker than front teats, whereas teat canal length and teat wall thickness did not differ according to quarter position. Milk yield and peak flow rate (PFR) were higher in rear than in front quarters. Teat canal length and VO were negatively correlated with PFR and average flow rate (AFR) but no correlations were observed between milkability traits and externally measurable teat characteristics like teat length or teat diameter. Individual milkability at an udder level is a complex characteristic that is determined by the milkability at a quarter level and the distribution of quarter milk yields. The anatomical and functional characteristics of single teats can partly explain the milk flow characteristics of individual quarters.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations142
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy CowsFrench-language works237,207