MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2185269371

A Genome-Wide Association Study for Immune Response Traits in Canadian Holsteins

2012· article· en· W2185269371 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
K.A. Thompson-Crispi, Ricardo Vieira Ventura, Flávio S. Schenkel, F. Miglior, Bonnie A. Mallard, Agri-Food Canada

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMastitisImmune systemColostrumHerdBiologyDairy cattleAnimal scienceVeterinary medicineImmunologyAntibodyMedicineMicrobiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inclusion of immune response traits in breeding indices has been suggested to improve inherent disease resistance in dairy cattle (Abdel-Azim et al., 2005; Mallard et al., 2011). Using the High Immune Response Technology developed at the University of Guelph, cows with superior cell-mediated (CMIR) and antibody-mediated immune responses (AMIR) can be identified (Wagter and Mallard, 2007). Holstein cows classified as High AMIR have been shown to have lower occurrence of mastitis in 2 out of 3 herds tested, improved response to commercial vaccine and increased milk and colostrum quality (Wagter et al., 2000). High immune response (HIR) cows have also been shown to have decreased incidence of diseases such as mastitis, metritis, ketosis and retained placenta (DeLapaz, 2008; Thompson-Crispi et al., 2012a). These previous studies found many benefits to identifying HIR cows in a herd, however, they were performed on one or a few herds in a single region.

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)0.002
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock→French-language works237,207→