Preference for pasture versus freestall housing by dairy cattle when stall availability indoors is reduced
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Providing cattle with access to pasture has been shown to yield benefits, including access to more space, fewer agonistic interactions, better air quality, and the ability to perform a greater range of normal behaviors. Preference for pasture appears to depend on several parameters, including weather conditions and availability of shade. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the preference for pasture versus inside a freestall barn with variable stocking densities at the stalls. We also investigated the effect of temperature-humidity index (THI) and precipitation on this preference. Overall, cows spent on average 13.7±2.6 h/d (mean ± SD) on pasture (ranging from 7.2 to 18.0 h/d across days); at night (between 2000 and 0600 h) cows spent the majority of their time (78.5±27.8%) on pasture. Stall availability had no effect on time spent outside, but time spent on pasture decreased with increasing THI during the day and declined during nights with more rainfall. Stall usage changed depending on stall availability; standing with 2 and 4 feet in the stall and lying time indoors decreased with decreasing stall availability. Indoor lying time also increased with higher THI and more precipitation. In conclusion, cows preferred to be outside at night; they were much more likely to remain indoors during the day, even when overstocked.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".