MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2189548547 · doi:10.21608/ejap.2009.94018

PREVALENCE OF BLAD AND CVM IN HOLSTEIN DAIRY CATTLE INTRODUCED TO MOROCCO

2009· article· en· W2189548547 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
I. Boujenane, Karima Ouhmama

Bibliographic record

VenueEgyptian Journal of Animal Production · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDairy cattleHolstein CattleAnimal scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this work was the estimation of BLAD and CVM prevalence in Holstein heifers and bulls that produced the semen introduced to Morocco.The study was carried out on 1874 heifers imported from France, Germany and Netherlands between 2005 and 2006 and 221 bulls that produced the semen imported from Canada, USA and France between 1999 and 2007.Based on the genotypes of sires and maternal grandsires mentioned on heifers' pedigrees, 2.1% and 17.5% of heifers introduced to Morocco were potential BLAD and CVM carriers, respectively.No bull that produced the semen was BLAD-carrier, whereas 0.5% bulls were CVM carriers.The frequency of at risk matings, i.e. those between potential carrier heifers and known carrier bulls, was 0 for BLAD and 0.7% for CVM.The frequency of mating between non-carrier heifers and confirmed carrier bulls was 0.2% and 16.8% for BLAD and CVM, respectively.The BLAD and CVM allele frequencies in heifers varied from 0.01 to 0.12 and from 0.03 to 0.14, respectively.It was concluded that a surveillance programme should be implemented in Morocco in order to avoid the introduction and the dissemination of farm animal hereditary defects.

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)0.000
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.246
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEgyptian Journal of Animal Production→Same topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock→French-language works237,207→