MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2166771160 · doi:10.2298/bah1006297m

Phenotypic and genetic parameters of reproductive traits in Tunisian Holstein cows

2010· article· en· W2166771160 on OpenAlexaff
Naceur M’Hamdi, R. Aloulou, Satinder Kaur Brar, Mahdi Bouallegue, Ben Hamouda

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnology in Animal Husbandry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIce calvingFertilityInseminationHeritabilityHerdBiologyParity (physics)Animal scienceArtificial inseminationDemographyPregnancyLactationPopulationGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Various factors influencing reproduction in dairy Holstein cows were routinely evaluated and genetic parameters were estimated for four traits for assessing fertility of artificially inseminated cows: Calving to first service interval (CFSI), calving interval (CI), calving to conception interval (CCI), and number of services per conception (NSC). Data used in this investigation consisted of records of insemination and calving events on Tunisian Holstein cows. Records were registered from 1994 to 2003 in 150 herds to study the effects of non-genetic factors and estimate the heritabilities of those fertility traits. The factors examined were: month and year of calving, herd, parity, and year-month of calving. The effect of month and year of calving (or insemination), herd, parity and year-month of calving were included in the model and were significant (P < 0.01) except for the number of lactations that does not have an effect on the number of services per conception. A decreasing efficiency in cow fertility was observed over the last years, with a longer day for first service interval. Heritability for fertility traits was low ranging from 0.027 for NSC to 0.067 for CI. The results suggested that more attention should be paid to herds with too low fertility traits and that monitoring/alert and intervention schemes should be tested in research/action approaches.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiotechnology in Animal Husbandry→Same topicReproductive Physiology in Livestock→French-language works237,207→