MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2566095075 · doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2016.12.011

Influence of milking method, disinfection and herd management practices on bulk tank milk somatic cell counts in tropical dairy herds in Colombia

2016· article· en· W2566095075 on OpenAlexafffund
Julián Reyes-Vélez, Javier Sánchez, Henrik Stryhn, Tatiana Ortiz, Martha Olivera, G.P. Keefe

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Veterinary Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy Cows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersInnovation PEI
KeywordsMilkingHerdSomatic cell countBulk tankAnimal scienceVeterinary medicineBiologyMedicineLactationIce calving

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aims of this study were to evaluate the effects of milking method, disinfection practices and other management factors on the bulk tank milk somatic cell count (BTSCC) in tropical dairy herds and to examine potential interactions with time. One hundred and thirty farms in the Northern region of Antioquia, Colombia, were visited once per month for 24 months. A two level linear mixed model for repeated measures was used to assess the impact on log transformed BTSCC (lnBTSCC). The geometric mean of the BTSCC for all herds was 262,330 cells/mL. The two-level linear mixed model showed that lnBTSCCs in hand milked herds were significantly higher than in machine milked herds. Fore-stripping corresponded with a 27% increase in lnBTSCC and failing to post-dip corresponded with a 45% increase in lnBTSCC. The two way interactions of sampling month with milking method, singeing udders and pre-dipping were significant. The lowest predicted lnBTSCC was observed in machine milked herds that practised both pre-dipping and singeing of udders. This study suggests that milking procedures and disinfection practices can interact with time and have substantial effects on lnBTSCC.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations21
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Veterinary JournalSame topicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy CowsFrench-language works237,207