Behavioural, health and cortisol responses of young calves to tail docking using a rubber ring or docking iron
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The acute responses of thirty-six 7- to 17-d-old Holstein calves to tail docking using a rubber ring or a hot docking iron were examined. Plasma cortisol concentrations were measured on day 0 and day +1. Behaviour was examined on days –1, 0, +1, +2, and +5 after treatment. Milk intake, weight gain, body temperature and faeces scores were monitored. Rubber ring application caused an increase in tail grooming up to day +5 after treatment. Shorter standing and lying periods as well as higher frequencies of standing and lying on day 0 were seen in the rubber ring group. No significant differences in behaviour were observed between the control group and the docking iron group. No significant differences in plasma cortisol concentrations were found between any groups except for 60 min after treatment when the rubber ring group exhibited a significantly higher concentration than the control group. No differences in milk intake, weight gain, body temperature or faeces score were found. Tail docking with a rubber ring causes a more pronounced behavioural and physiological response than docking with a docking iron. However, long-term effects need to be investigated. Key words: Calves, tail docking, pain, behaviour, cortisol, stress
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".