MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Prediction of Dry Matter Intake Throughout Lactation in a Dynamic Model of Dairy Cow Performance

2006· article· en· W2024850850 on OpenAlexafffund
J.L. Ellis, F. Qiao, J.P. Cant

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCargill
KeywordsLactationDry matterNet energyEnergy balanceAnimal scienceMathematicsHerdBiologyPregnancyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the dynamic modeling of dairy cow performance over a full lactation, the difference between net energy intake and net energy used for maintenance, growth, and output in milk accumulates in body reserves. A simple dynamic model of net energy balance was constructed to select, out of some common dry matter intake (DMI) prediction equations, the one that resulted in a minimum cumulative bias in body energy deposition. Dry matter intake was predicted using the Cornell Net Carbohydrate and Protein System, Agricultural Research Council, or National Research Council (NRC) DMI equations from body weight (BW) and predicted fat-corrected milk yield. The instantaneous BW of cows at progressive weeks of lactation was simulated as the numerical integral of the BW change obtained from the predicted net energy balance. Predicted DMI and BW from each DMI equation, using either of 2 equations to describe maintenance energy expenditures, were compared statistically against observed data from 21 herd average published full lactation data sets. All DMI equations underpredicted BW and DMI, but the NRC DMI equation resulted in the minimum cumulative error in predicted BW and DMI. As a general solution to prevent predicted BW from deviating substantially over time from the observed BW, a lipostatic feedback mechanism was integrated into the NRC DMI equation as a 2-parameter linear function of the relative size of simulated body reserves and week of lactation. Residual sum of squares was reduced on average by 52% for BW predictions and by 41% for DMI predictions by inclusion of the negative feedback with parameters taken from the average of all 21 least squares fits. Similarly, root mean square prediction error (%) was reduced by 30% on average for BW predictions and by 23% for DMI predictions. Inclusion of a feedback of energy reserves onto predicted DMI, simulating lipostatic regulation of BW, solved the problem of final BW deviation within a dynamic model and improved its DMI prediction to a satisfactory level.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations16
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy Science→Same topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology→French-language works237,207→