Short-term effects of regrouping on behavior of prepartum dairy cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives were to determine the effect of regrouping during the dry period on feeding, social, rumination, and lying behavior for cows that were moved to a new pen and cows that remained in their home pen but had new cows introduced. Forty-eight prepartum Holstein dairy cows were housed in groups of 6 and regrouped in groups of 3 (16 triads) with 1 triad moving to another pen and 1 triad staying in the same pen; the triad was considered the experimental unit. For 7 d before and 8 d after regrouping, cows were continuously monitored for feeding, rumination, and lying behavior by means of an electronic feeding system, a rumination logger on each cow's neck, and a data logger attached to 1 of the hind legs, respectively. Video recording was used to monitor displacements at the feeder for 3h following the afternoon fresh feed delivery before regrouping and for the 2 subsequent afternoon feed deliveries after regrouping. Cows that were moved to a new pen after regrouping decreased DMI by approximately 9% on the day of regrouping compared with baseline values, but cows that remained in their home pen showed no significant decrease in intake after regrouping. Feeding rate decreased in both treatments by 10% after regrouping. Rumination times also decreased by approximately 9% in both treatments, reaching the lowest values on the day of regrouping for cows that stayed in the home pen and on the day after regrouping for the moved cows. Cows that were moved to a new pen displaced other cows at the feeder twice as frequently after regrouping, but no such effect of regrouping on cows that stayed in the home pen was observed. These results indicate that regrouping can affect behavior of prepartum dairy cows, especially those cows that are moved to a new pen.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".