MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2264544243 · doi:10.3168/jds.2015-10336

Associations between lying behavior and lameness in Canadian Holstein-Friesian cows housed in freestall barns

2016· article· en· W2264544243 on OpenAlex
L. Solano, Herman W. Barkema, Edmond A. Pajor, Steve Mason, S.J. LeBlanc, C.G.R. Nash, Derek B. Haley, D. Pellerin, J. Rushen, A.M. de Passillé, E. Vasseur, Karin Orsel

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité LavalUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Calgary
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaCanadian Dairy CommissionDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsAnimal scienceLamenessLyingHolstein CattleDairy cattleBiologyMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lying behavior is an important measure of comfort and well-being in dairy cattle, and changes in lying behavior are potential indicators and predictors of lameness. Our objectives were to determine individual and herd-level risk factors associated with measures of lying behavior, and to evaluate whether automated measures of lying behavior can be used to detect lameness. A purposive sample of 40 Holstein cows was selected from each of 141 dairy farms in Alberta, Ontario, and Québec. Lying behavior of 5,135 cows between 10 and 120 d in milk was automatically and continuously recorded using accelerometers over 4 d. Data on factors hypothesized to influence lying behavior were collected, including information on individual cows, management practices, and facility design. Associations between predictor variables and measures of lying behavior were assessed using generalized linear mixed models, including farm and province as random and fixed effects, respectively. Logistic regression models were used to determine whether lying behavior was associated with lameness. At the cow-level, daily lying time increased with increasing days in milk, but this effect interacted with parity; primiparous cows had more frequent but shorter lying bouts in early lactation, changing to mature-cow patterns of lying behavior (fewer and longer lying bouts) in late lactation. In barns with stall curbs >22 cm high, the use of sand or >2 cm of bedding was associated with an increased average daily lying time of 1.44 and 0.06 h/d, respectively. Feed alleys ≥ 350 cm wide or stalls ≥ 114 cm wide were associated with increased daily lying time of 0.39 and 0.33 h/d, respectively, whereas rubber flooring in the feed alley was associated with 0.47 h/d lower average lying time. Lame cows had longer lying times, with fewer, longer, and more variable duration of bouts compared with nonlame cows. In that regard, cows with lying time ≥ 14 h/d, ≤ 5 lying bouts per day, bout duration ≥ 110 min/bout, or standard deviations of bout duration over 4 d ≥ 70 min had 3.7, 1.7, 2.5, and 3.0 higher odds of being lame, respectively. Factors related to comfort of lying and standing surfaces significantly affected lying behavior. Finally, we inferred that automated measures of lying behavior could contribute to lameness detection, especially when interpreted in the context of other factors known to affect lying behavior, including those associated with the individual cow (e.g., parity and stage of lactation) or environment (e.g., stall surface).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.275 · 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