The effects of feeding space on the behavioural responses of cattle during rest periods offered as part of long-distance transportation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Livestock transport regulations in many countries require that cattle be unloaded for feed, water and rest when they are being transported long distances, but there are few evidence-based guidelines about how to most effectively manage and provide these requirements at rest stops. The aim of this study was to assess whether available feeding space at a commercial rest facility affected eating behaviour and general activity. Twenty-four trailer loads of cattle were selected for study, and each load was divided into two groups. The control group was provided ad libitum access to a single, round, hay-bale feeder. The treatment group had two round, hay-bale feeders and thus twice as much feeding space per animal. Cattle behaviour was recorded during a 5-h rest period using instantaneous scan sampling every 5 min. This was performed at the group level by counting the number of animals engaged in pre-defined activities, as well as individually by tracking a subset of focal animals from each group. Behaviour was categorised as one of the following: eating, drinking, lying, or ‘other’. Interruptions to eating were also quantified. Eating was counted as interrupted when, instead of being followed by a consecutive eating observation, it was interspersed by another behaviour. Doubling feeding space increased the mean proportion of cattle eating by 30%, decreased interruption of eating bouts and had no effect on drinking and lying behaviour. Increased access to feed has potential welfare and health benefits. These data can be used to inform standards for feeding beef cattle at rest stops during long distance travel.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it