Estimating challenge load due to disease outbreaks and other challenges using reproduction records of sows1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A method was developed and tested to estimate challenge load due to disease outbreaks and other challenges in sows using reproduction records. The method was based on reproduction records from a farm with known disease outbreaks. It was assumed that the reduction in weekly reproductive output within a farm is proportional to the magnitude of the challenge. As the challenge increases beyond certain threshold, it is manifested as an outbreak. The reproduction records were divided into 3 datasets. The first dataset called the Training dataset consisted of 57,135 reproduction records from 10,901 sows from 1 farm in Canada with several outbreaks of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS). The known disease status of sows was regressed on the traits number born alive, number of losses as a combination of still birth and mummified piglets, and number of weaned piglets. The regression coefficients from this analysis were then used as weighting factors for derivation of an index measure called challenge load indicator. These weighting factors were derived with i) a two-step approach using residuals or year-week solutions estimated from a previous step, and ii) a single-step approach using the trait values directly. Two types of models were used for each approach: a logistic regression model and a general additive model. The estimates of challenge load indicator were then compared based on their ability to detect PRRS outbreaks in a Test dataset consisting of records from 65,826 sows from 15 farms in the Netherlands. These farms differed from the Canadian farm with respect to PRRS virus strains, severity and frequency of outbreaks. The single-step approach using a general additive model was best and detected 14 out of the 15 outbreaks. This approach was then further validated using the third dataset consisting of reproduction records of 831,855 sows in 431 farms located in different countries in Europe and America. A total of 41 out of 48 outbreaks detected using data analysis were confirmed based on diagnostic information received from the farms. Among these, 30 outbreaks were due to PRRS while 11 were due to other diseases and challenging conditions. The results suggest that proposed method could be useful for estimation of challenge load and detection of challenge phases such as disease outbreaks.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".