Gilt replacement strategies used in two swine production areas in Quebec in regard to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To describe gilt replacement strategies in regard to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) and to assess differences between high density (HD) and moderate density (MD) pig areas. Materials and methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in breeding sites located in an HD (n = 68) and an MD area (n = 52) in Quebec between May 2005 and August 2008. A questionnaire on strategies used to introduce replacement gilts was completed and PRRSV status was assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay or reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction. Sites housing at least one pig positive by either test were classified as PRRSV-positive. Strategies were described according to herd characteristics, PRRSV status, and area. Results: Self-replacement and purchase of mature or immature gilts were observed on 37%, 35%, and 28% of sites, respectively. In positive sites purchasing mature gilts, 18% had a PRRSV-positive supplier, and gilts were introduced either directly into the sow herd (15%) or after isolation (41%) or acclimatization (44%). Most positive sites purchasing immature gilts practiced acclimatization (93%), either by commingling gilts with commercial pigs (93%) or inoculating serum (7%). Acclimatization processes were rarely monitored through diagnostic procedures. Lower sow inventory, higher prevalence of PRRSV infection, and higher frequency of self-replacement were observed in the HD compared to the MD area. Negative and positive sites practicing voluntary exposure to PRRSV both clustered spatially within the MD area. Implication: Replacement strategies may have weaknesses that should be addressed to facilitate PRRSV management at the herd and regional levels.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".