MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2377292188 · doi:10.1016/s1671-2927(12)60795-0

Month-Wise Prevalence of Subclinical Mastitis in Dairy Cows in Guangdong Province, China

2012· article· en· W2377292188 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jinbo Yang, Neng Wei, Liufa Wen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Integrative Agriculture · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEffects of Environmental Stressors on Livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMastitisAnimal scienceVeterinary medicineQuarter (Canadian coin)Subclinical infectionDairy cattleMedicineBiologyGeographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To evaluate the month-wise prevalence of subclinical mastitis (SM) and its relations with climatic temperature and humidity, and to provide references for control and prevention of mastitis in dairy cows in Guangdong, China, California mastitis test method was used to determine the monthly prevalence of SM (MPSM, %) of lactating Holstein cows from 11 dairy farms in Guangdong Province, China, including about 516 cows per monthly examination. The average MPSM on a cow and a quarter basis were 30 and 13% respectively, and there was a positive linear correlation between monthly mean air temperature (MT, ?C) and MPSM on a cow basis (r=0.763, P=0.004) or a quarter basis (r=0.577, P=0.049), but there were no correlations between MT and MPSM on a cow or a quarter basis (P>0.05). There was a shift in MPSM trend that the highest MPSM (38.4%) was not for the hottest July with MT at 30.8?C, but for the later September at 27.9?C. The farms need to develop new housing conditions to control cowshed temperatures in the hot season to reduce the mastitis prevalences in the posthot months.

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)0.001
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Integrative AgricultureSame topicEffects of Environmental Stressors on LivestockFrench-language works237,207