Short Communication: Effect of Feed Barrier Design on the Behavior of Loose-Housed Lactating Dairy Cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of 2 feed barrier systems on feeding and social behavior of dairy cows. Forty-eight lactating Holstein cows were subjected to each of 2 treatments in a cross-over design. The treatments were 2 types of feed-line barriers: 1) post-and-rail, and 2) headlock. Time-lapse video was used to quantify the feeding behavior and incidence of aggressive displacements of the cows at the feed bunk. Average daily feeding time did not differ when cows used the headlock barrier compared with the post-and-rail barrier. However, there were certain changes in feeding time during periods of peak feeding activity: cows that had lower feeding times relative to group mates when using the post-and-rail barrier showed more similar feeding times to group mates when using the headlock barrier. There were 21% fewer displacements at the feed bunk when cows accessed feed by the headlock barrier compared with the post-and-rail barrier. These results suggest that using a headlock barrier reduces aggression at the feed bunk and improves access to feed for socially subordinate cows during peak feeding periods.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".