An observational study of naturally occurring gastrointestinal nematode infections in a seasonal grazing cow-calf herd in southern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little work has been done to determine the prevalence of gastrointestinal nematodes (GIN) in Ontario cow–calf herds. A prospective single cohort study was conducted during the grazing seasons of 2014 and 2015. Twenty-four crossbred cows were randomly assigned to one of six rotationally grazed fields each year, blocked by calving date and parity (n = 48). Feces were collected and weight and body condition score (cows) recorded at approximately 28 d intervals. Fecal egg counts (FEC) were performed using the Wisconsin method. No clinical signs of GIN parasitism were observed. Cow FEC stayed relatively low throughout both pasture seasons [mean 8 ± 20.02 eggs per gram (epg) of feces, n = 301]. Most calf FEC were also low throughout both seasons (mean 42 ± 86.20 epg, n = 268). The sample time [a proxy for days on pasture (DOP)] had a significant effect on cow epg (P < 0.001) and calf epg (P < 0.001). Cow and calf FEC peaked at the fourth sample, after 55–72 DOP; 4 epg (95% CI 2.57, 6.32) and 24 epg (95% CI 15.82, 37.19) for cows and calves, respectively. Mean calf FEC did not have a significant effect on calf weaning weight (P = 0.9).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".