MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018570778 · doi:10.3168/jds.2013-7615

Effect of prepartum photoperiod and melatonin feeding on milk production and prolactin concentration in dairy heifers and cows

2014· article· en· W2018570778 on OpenAlexafffund
P. Lacasse, C. Vinet, D. Petitclerc

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaPublic Works and Government Services Canada
KeywordsMelatoninphotoperiodismLactationIce calvingAnimal scienceProlactinBiologyEndocrinologyInternal medicineMilkingPregnancyHormoneMedicineBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Holstein multiparous cows (n = 29) and primiparous heifers (n = 32) calving over a 1-yr period were subjected to photoperiod-melatonin treatments according to a 2 × 3 factorial design. Starting 8 wk before expected calving, all animals were subjected to 1 of the following treatments: 8h of light and 16 h of dark (8L:16D), 16 h of light and 8h of dark (16L:8D), or 16L:8D plus melatonin feeding (16L:8D-melatonin). Each day at 1355 h, the animals in the melatonin treatment received orally a gelatin capsule containing 25mg of melatonin. The treatments ended at calving, when the animals were moved to the lactation barn; all animals were then subjected to about 16 h of light per day. At the beginning and end of the treatment period before calving, blood samples were taken from 6 heifers and 6 cows through a jugular cannula for 24h at 30-min intervals to monitor serum melatonin and prolactin concentrations. Milk production in the heifers was not affected by the photoperiod treatments. Early-lactation milk production was higher in the cows exposed to the short-day photoperiod than in those exposed to a long-day photoperiod (16L:8D and 16L:8D-melatonin), with averages of 36.7 ± 0.9, 33.1 ± 0.8, and 34.1 ± 0.9 kg/d for 8L:16D, 16L:8D, and 16L:8D-melatonin, respectively. Photoperiod had no effect on late-lactation milk production in the cows. During lactation, the dry matter intake of heifers was not affected by the treatments, but dry matter intake of the cows exposed to a short-day photoperiod was greater than that of the cows exposed to a long-day photoperiod. Feed efficiency of heifers was improved by short-day photoperiod. During the treatment period, prolactin concentration was lower in the animals exposed to a short-day photoperiod than in those exposed to a long-day photoperiod, was lower with the 16L:8D-melatonin treatment than with the 16L:8D treatment, and tended to be lower with the 8L:16D treatment than with the 16L:8D-melatonin treatment, with averages of 3.5 ± 0.8, 9.9 ± 0.8, and 6.0 ± 0.8 ng/mL for 8L:16D, 16L:8D, and 16L:8D-melatonin, respectively. In early lactation, prolactin concentration was lower in the heifers exposed to the 16L:8D photoperiod during the dry period than in those exposed to the 8L:16D photoperiod or fed melatonin. In conclusion, a short-day photoperiod during the dry period transiently increases milk production of cows and the feed efficiency of heifers in the following lactation. However, melatonin cannot be used to mimic a short-day photoperiod during the dry period.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations43
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicReproductive Physiology in LivestockFrench-language works237,207