Efficacy of using an internal teat sealer to prevent new intramammary infections in nonlactating dairy cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether insertion of an internal teat sealer (ITS) at the end of lactation would prevent development of new intramammary infections (IMIs) during the nonlactating period. DESIGN: Controlled clinical trial. ANIMALS: 939 Holstein-Friesian dairy cows from 16 herds. PROCEDURES: Results of bacteriologic culture of milk samples collected 14 days prior to the end of lactation were used to assign cows to groups (group 1 = negative results for all quarters; group 2 = positive results for > or = 1 quarter). Quarters of cows in group 1 were treated with an ITS or a single intramammary dose of cloxacillin; quarters of cows in group 2 were treated with cloxacillin in conjunction with an ITS or with cloxacillin alone. Milk samples were collected at the end of lactation and within 8 days after calving. RESULTS: Regardless of whether the outcome of interest was new IMIs caused by any pathogens, major pathogens, environmental pathogens, or streptococci other than Streptococcus agalactiae, quarters in group 2 treated with both cloxacillin and an ITS were less likely to develop a new IMI than were quarters treated with cloxacillin alone. For cows in group 1, no significant difference in risk of new IMIs was found between treatments. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggest that for dairy cattle with an IMI late in the lactation period, intramammary administration of cloxacillin at the end of lactation followed by insertion of an ITS enhanced protection against development of new IMIs, compared with use of cloxacillin alone.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".