MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2234024372 · doi:10.15232/pas.2015-01409

Effect of feeding rate of milk replacer with early weaning and protocols for water treatment and sanitation on dairy calf growth and health

2015· article· en· W2234024372 on OpenAlexaff
T.M. Hill, Xavier Suarez-Mena, H.G. Bateman, J.M. Aldrich, R.L. Schlotterbeck

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Professional Animal Scientist · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal health and immunology
Canadian institutionsCargill (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal scienceCompletely randomized designWeaningFecesStarterFactorial experimentBiologyChemistryFood scienceMathematicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forty-eight Holstein calves (12 per treatment) were fed 2 rates of the milk replacer (MR; 27% CP, 17% fat powder) with 2 water treatment and sanitation protocols. The protocols were 0 (using 500 mg/L sodium hyperchlorite wash water) or 5 mg/L of chlorine dioxide (using 50 mg/L chlorine dioxide wash water). The MR rates were either 0.66 kg (MOD) or up to 1.1 kg (HI) of DM daily divided into 2 equal meals fed at 0630 and 1600 h daily. Calves fed MOD received 0.66 kg of DM from d 1 to 25, then 0.33 kg of DM in only the a.m. feeding from d 26 to 28. Calves fed HI received 0.79 kg of DM from d 1 to 7, 1.1 kg of DM from d 8 to 21, 0.66 kg of DM from d 22 to 25, and 0.33 kg of DM in the a.m. only from d 26 to 28. Free−choice starter (20% CP) and water was fed from d 1 to 56. Calves were initially 2 to 4 d of age and 47 ± 1.2 kg. The 2 MR rates and 2 water treatments were analyzed as a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement in a completely randomized design with repeated measures. Cryptosporidium was the predominate organism found in the fecal samples. There was no effect of sanitation protocol on performance or health of calves. Calves fed HI MR had 18% greater ADG and more medical days over the 56-d trial than calves fed MOD MR, whereas there was no difference in hip width change.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Professional Animal ScientistSame topicAnimal health and immunologyFrench-language works237,207