MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081498376 · doi:10.4141/cjas07127

Decreased fertility with increasing parity in lactating dairy cows

2008· article· en· W2081498376 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
A. Balendran, Miriam Gordon, Thavaneetharajah Pretheeban, Rajinder Singh, Ruwanie Perera, R. Rajamahedran

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsParity (physics)FertilityAnimal scienceArtificial inseminationInseminationPregnancyBiologyPregnancy rateMedicinePopulationGeneticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relationships of parity and progesterone (P4) concentrations during the bred cycle with pregnancy rate (PR) were examined in this study. Breeding records of 163 Holstein heifers and cows (in 1st parity, 2nd parity, and 3rd or 4th parity) from the Uuniversity of British Columbia Dairy Education and Research Centre were used to compare PR among heifers, 1st, 2nd and 3rd/4th parity cows. Blood or milk samples collected from 10 animals of each treatment group were assayed to compare P4 concentrations among treatment groups. Statistical analysis showed that the heifers' first insemination PR (67.9%) was higher (P < 0.05) from 1st parity (42.9%), 2nd parity, (20.0%) and 3rd/4th parity cows (11.9%). P4 concentrations were not significantly different (P > 0.05). Key words: Pregnancy rate, progesterone, parity, cows, heifers

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicReproductive Physiology in LivestockFrench-language works237,207