Incomplete Milking in Early Lactation Does Not Affect Dairy Cows Resting Behaviors: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of incomplete milking during the first 5 d of lactation on the resting behavior of commercial dairy cows. The hypothesis was that the elevated intramammary pressure resulting from milk retained in the udder in incompletely milked cows could lead to a change in lying behaviour. This study was a randomized controlled trial in which cows from 2 farms were randomly allocated into a treatment (n = 18) or a control group (n = 14). Cows in the treatment group were milked incompletely (10 – 14 L / d) during the first 5 d of lactation, while cows in the control group were milked as usually done on farm. Resting behaviors were recorded with a data logger. Linear mixed models were used to quantify the effects of treatment group on three dependent variables measured between 2 and 14 days in milk: daily duration of lying time (h / d), lying bout frequency (bouts / d), and mean duration of lying bouts (min / bout). There was no significant effect of treatment on lying time. However, the effect of treatment on frequency of lying bouts and on mean lying bout duration varied by parity level. Incompletely milked cows in 2nd parity had a higher number of lying bouts (11.9 bouts / d vs. 9.2 bouts / d) and shorter mean lying bout duration (57.8 min / bout vs. 66.7 min) than control cows. In 3rd parity or more, the opposite happened. Therefore, our results suggest that an incomplete milking may be slightly problematic for 2nd parity cows and, possibly, slightly beneficial for older cows. Whether the differences observed resulted from a biologic process (discomfort due to the incomplete milking) or from random error will have to be determined by future research.
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 | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".