MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082904025 · doi:10.3168/jds.2010-3596

Economic effect of short (35-d) compared with conventional (60-d) dry period management in commercial Canadian Holstein herds

2011· article· en· W2082904025 on OpenAlexafffundabout
D.E. Santschi, D. Lefebvre, R.I. Cue, C.L. Girard, D. Pellerin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalMcGill UniversityValacta (Canada)Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesNovalaitMinistère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'Alimentation
KeywordsHerdRevenueMilk productionProduction (economics)Animal scienceTotal revenueAgricultural scienceButterfatDairy industryBusinessMilk fatEconomicsBiologyFood scienceAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian dairy industry operates under a supply management system with production quotas (expressed in kilograms of butterfat per day) owned by dairy producers. Any management strategy influencing production responses must, therefore, be evaluated to estimate its effects on quota needed to sell the milk produced. In the present study, half of the cows from 13 commercial herds (850 cows, average of 70 cows per herd) were assigned to be managed for a short dry period (SDP; 35 d dry) and the other half was managed for a conventional dry period (CDP; 60 d dry) to evaluate the economic impact of a steady state involving either CDP or SDP. Economic variables included in the partial budget were: variations in revenues from milk and components as well as animals sold; costs related to feeding, reproduction, replacement, housing, and treatments. All variables were first estimated on a cow basis for each herd individually, and average results were used to calculate the partial budget for an average herd. Yearly milk and component yields per cow increased, which implies that fewer cows are required to produce the same amount of quota. Accordingly, 2 scenarios were investigated: in the first one, available quota was kept constant, and herd size was adjusted to avoid over-quota production. Consequently, the partial budget was calculated considering that 5 fewer cows were present in the herd. In this situation, switching to an SDP management increased net annual income for the farm by $2,677 (Can$), which represents $41.38 per cow. In the second scenario, the number of cows was kept constant, but additional quota (5.5 kg/d, $25,000/kg) was bought to allow selling all of the milk produced. In this case, net farm income was increased by $17,132 annually with SDP, which represents $245.18 per cow. This budget includes interest on the purchase of quota. A comparison of partial budgets for individual herds involved in the study revealed considerable variation among herds. Switching from a CDP to a SDP management would be beneficial for average dairy herds in eastern Canada.

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)0.001
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 score0.571
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207