Lameness, Activity Time-Budgets, and Estrus Expression in Dairy Cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to identify specific behavioral patterns that contribute to diminished estrus expression in lame cows. Behavioral scan and focal sampling were used to examine the effect of lameness on daily activity budgets, sexual behavior, feeding activities, and body condition score. A total of 59 milking cows (51.8 +/- 1.4 d postpartum) were monitored on a commercial dairy farm for 5 d following estrus synchronization. Overall, lame cows (n = 39) spent proportionately less time elevated on their feet and more time lying down compared with nonlame cows (n = 20). This included lame cows spending less time walking or standing. Overall, the total proportion of scans in which an estrous behavior was observed was very small but tended to be smaller for lame compared with nonlame cows. Throughout a day, lame cows displayed a lower proportion of estrous behaviors in the early morning. Lameness did not affect durations of drinking, grazing, or ruminating, or how these behavioral states fluctuated throughout the day. Similarly, rumination chewing rates were the same for lame and nonlame cows, and there was no association between lameness and dominance/displacement while feeding at a feed-fence. Lame cows did, however, have a slower bite rate at pasture and had a lower body condition score. Lame cows were also nearer the rear of the herd, both as they left the field and when entering the milking parlor. In conclusion, lame cows have longer lying times and spend less time standing, walking, and expressing an estrous behavior. Lame cows also have a lower bite rate at pasture and are more likely to be of lower body condition score.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".