The effect of dystocia on the dry matter intake and behavior of Holstein cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dairy cows that have a difficult calf delivery (dystocia) are more likely to develop health complications after calving, reducing productivity and welfare. Understanding the behavioral cues of dystocia may facilitate prompt obstetric assistance and reduce the long-term effect of the challenging delivery. The aim of this study was to describe the effects of dystocia on dairy cow behavior during the period around calving and to assess the use of these behaviors as potential indicators of dystocia. Individual dry matter intake, water intake, feeding and drinking time, meal size, standing time, and number of transitions from standing to lying positions (bouts) were recorded during the 48-h period before and after the time of calf delivery for 22 Holstein cows [11 cows with dystocia and 11 cows with unassisted delivery (eutocia)]. Cows with dystocia consumed 1.9 kg less during the 48 h before calving compared with cows with eutocia (14.3 +/- 1.0 vs. 16.2 +/- 1.0 kg, respectively), and this difference increased to 2.6 kg in the 24 h before calving (8.3 +/- 0.7 vs. 10.9 +/- 0.7 kg/d). There were no differences in drinking time between the groups, but cows with dystocia consumed less water 24 h before calving (22.4 +/- 4.4 vs. 36.2 +/- 4.4 kg/d, respectively) and consumed more water during the 24-h period after calving (56.9 +/- 3.1 vs. 48.7 +/- 3.1 kg/d) compared with cows with eutocia. Cows with dystocia transitioned from standing to lying positions more frequently than cows without dystocia beginning 24 h before calving (10.9 +/- 0.7 vs. 8.3 +/- 0.7 bouts/d). Dry matter intake and standing bouts in the 24 h before calving were the most accurate variables in discriminating between cows with and without dystocia, suggesting that cows with dystocia begin to alter their behavior beginning 24 h before calving.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".