Observations of piglet-directed behavior patterns and skin lesions in eleven commercial swine herds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To determine the frequencies of piglet-directed behavior performed by weaned piglets in 11 commercial herds during relatively short videotaped observations, and to test the relationships among frequency of observed behavior, injury scores, and biosecurity scores. Materials and methods: Behavior and skin lesion scores (Mild, Moderate, or Severe) were sampled during a single visit to each of 11 commercial swine herds. The frequencies of belly nosing, nosing or chewing on ears and tails, and aggression were sampled from 2-hour video recordings of the pigs. For each herd, a biosecurity score was compiled from information regarding isolation from other herds as well as general on-farm hygiene practices according to the Ontario Swine Health Improvement Plan. Results: All three recorded behavior patterns were observed in each herd, but frequencies varied across herds. Belly nosing was observed most often, and its frequency was negatively correlated with average weaning age. Aggression had the lowest frequency among the three behaviors, but was positively correlated with nosing or chewing on the ears or tails of other pigs. Skin scores were not significantly correlated with frequencies of behavior or weaning age. However, the proportion of pigs with Moderate and Severe lesions on the ears and abdomen decreased as the biosecurity score for the herd improved. Implications: Frequencies of belly nosing in commercial herds were negatively correlated with weaning age. However, belly nosing was also observed at a relatively high frequency in one herd with later weaned piglets, suggesting that other factors may influence this behavior.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".