Heritability of udder morphology and colostrum quality traits in swine1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The heritability of udder quality traits, defined as morphology and colostrum IgG concentration at farrowing, was estimated together with the genetic and phenotypic correlations of these traits with other production and reproduction criteria. Udder morphology traits were recorded in 988 Meidam sows and colostrum samples were collected from 528 sows. Teat length, teat diameter (DIA), interteat distance within the same row (SAMER), and teat distance from the abdominal midline (AML) were recorded to the nearest millimeter. For each sow, a record was also made of udder development score (DEV), the proportion of teats oriented perpendicular to the udder, and the proportion of nonfunctional teats. Colostrum IgG concentration was estimated with a Brix refractometer. Heritability of udder morphology traits varied from high ( = 0.46 for teat length and = 0.56 for DIA) to moderate ( = 0.37 for SAMER, = 0.22 for AML, = 0.25 for DEV, = 0.3 for the proportion of nonfunctional teats, = 0.1 for the proportion of teats oriented perpendicular to the udder, and = 0.35 for colostrum IgG concentration). The SAMER was negatively genetically correlated with the number of stillborns (genetic correlation [] = -0.48) and positively genetically correlated with the number of piglets born alive ( = 0.69), with the opposite for the trait AML ( = -0.40 for number of piglets born alive and = 0.40 for stillborns). The highest genetic correlation with productive traits was estimated between AML and ADG during rearing ( = 0.42), although this had a negative phenotypic correlation (; -0.11). Teat length was also moderately correlated with ADG ( = 0.27). Backfat thickness at 100 kg was positively correlated with DIA and the total number of teats present in both rows ( = 0.28 and = 0.36, respectively) and negatively correlated only with DEV ( = -0.22). The same results were found for the phenotypic correlation between backfat thickness at end of test and the total number of teats present in both rows ( = 0.03). Udder quality traits can be included in the breeding goal and appropriately weighted with other important traits in the breeding objectives to enhance maternal performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".