Effects of intermittent cold exposure varying in intensity on core body temperature and resting heat production of beef cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crossbred beef heifers (n = 18) fed at 1.3× maintenance were exposed to summer daytime temperatures (20 ± 0.2°C) for 8 h (08:00 until 16:00) and to control (22°C), moderate (–6°C) or cold (–15°C) environments for 16 h daily (16:00 until 08:00) for a minimum 21-d adaptation period to investigate the effects of in tensity of intermittent cold exposure on vaginal temperature and resting heat production. Resting heat production was measured at the end of the adaptation period. Vaginal temperature was continuously monitored throughout the experiment using radiotelemetry. Vaginal temperature increased immediately after the onset of cold exposure in both moderate and cold treatments, peaked after 3 h, and returned to pre-exposure levels by the time the 16-h treatment ended. In contrast, vaginal temperatures of control heifers peaked only after feeding at 08:30. Treatment did not affect daily maximum (P= 0.60), mean (P = 0.72) or minimum (P = 0.34) vaginal temperatures, but heifers in both cold-exposed treatments spent more time (P = 0.03) with vaginal temperatures exceeding the daily mean vaginal temperature than control heifers. Compared to control heifers, the variability of vaginal temperature increased 1.8- and 2.2-fold in the moderate and cold treatments, respectively (P = 0.04), and did not change with time (P = 0.98 ). Resting heat production did not increase following 21 d of exposure to moderate and cold conditions. Results of this study indicate that intermittent cold exposure influenced circadian body temperature rhythms without increasing resting heat production. Key words: Beef cattle, thermoregulation, vaginal temperature, heat production.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".