Lack of effect of 10 kV/m 60 Hz electric field exposure on pregnant dairy heifer hormones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sixteen pregnant Holstein heifers weighing 521 +/- 46 kg, at 3.3 +/- 0.7 months of gestation and 2.2 +/- 2.0 months of age were confined to wooden metabolism cages and were exposed to a vertical electric field (EF) of 10.0 +/- 0.4 kV/m and an artificial light cycle of 12 h light-12 h dark. The heifers were divided into two replicates of eight each. Each replicate was divided into two groups of four animals each, one group becoming the non-exposed and the second, the EF exposed group. The exposed group were housed in metabolism cages in an area where EF were generated, and the non-exposed group, in metabolism cages located in the adjacent area where the EF was less than 2% of that present in the exposed area. The test animals were subject to the different treatments for 4 weeks continuously. After 4 weeks, the animals switched treatment, the exposed group becoming the non-exposed group and vice-versa. Then the treatment continued for 4 more weeks. Catheters were inserted into the jugular vein of the animals, and blood samples were collected on twice a week to estimate the serum concentration of progesterone (P4), melatonin (MLT), prolactin (PRL), and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1). Feed consumption was measured daily and feed samples were collected twice a week. The results indicated that exposure of dairy cattle to EF similar to those encountered directly underneath a 735 kV high tension electrical power line carrying a maximum load of current, cannot be associated with any variation in the experimental variables mentioned above. An exception to this, is the variation in MLT, which was associated with the EF exposure. Due to the inconsistency of the MLT response in the different replicates, caution should be exercised in the interpretation of this phenomenon.
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) | 0.002 | 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".