MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594831060 · doi:10.3168/jds.2016-11698

Adoption and consistency of application of premilking preparation in Ontario dairy herds

2017· article· en· W2594831060 on OpenAlexafffundabout
E. Belage, Simon Dufour, D.A. Shock, Andria Jones‐Bitton, D.F. Kelton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy Cows
Canadian institutionsCegep de Saint HyacintheUniversité de MontréalUniversity of Guelph
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsDairy Farmers of OntarioDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsMilkingUdderHerdAutomatic milkingLogistic regressionMastitisAnimal scienceTime lagVeterinary medicineLagStatisticsMedicineBiologyMathematicsLactationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Milking management practices that affect udder health have been widely studied, leading to a variety of evidence-based recommendations. Lack of adoption or inconsistency in milking practices can interfere with efforts to prevent mastitis in the herd. The study objective was to assess the variation in adoption and application consistency of important milk harvest practices between and within farms over time. During the summer of 2013, 50 herds in southern Ontario were visited twice within a month, at milking time, and a single person observed and time-recorded premilking preparation procedures. A generalized mixed model was used to partition the variance for predisinfectant contact time and preparation lag time (time between the first contact with the teats and cluster attachment), and determine the proportion of variation attributable to farms, milkers, visits, and characteristics of a cow milking. Using logistic regression, models were built to assess factors affecting adequate contact time and adequate preparation lag time, respectively. Farm, the person(s) milking, and visit number were used as random effects in both instances. In both models, farm-to-farm differences and variations between cows during a specific milking accounted for the largest part of the variability seen in both contact time (47 and 44%, respectively) and preparation lag time (40 and 36%, respectively). For both outcomes, milkers were consistent in their routines over the 2 visits (only 9 and 3.1% of total variance for contact and preparation lag time, respectively). Parlors were more likely to meet the recommended contact time than tie-stalls; increased number of milkers at milking time and having contact times under 30 s had negative effects on meeting recommended preparation lag time. The majority of farms in the study complied with the recommendations for adequate milking practices; however, most did not follow a consistent timed protocol. There are several potential sources of variation in the milking routine on a dairy farm. To improve milk quality and udder health, it is important to identify whether best management practices are being implemented on each farm. Producers appeared to be consistent in the application of milking procedures across time, regardless of whether or not they were correct. Hence, with corrective education and training, improvements in these practices could be experienced and maintained to promote better udder health.

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)0.005
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 score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy CowsFrench-language works237,207