MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2617941063 · doi:10.3168/jds.2017-12750

Management practices for male calves on Canadian dairy farms

2017· article· en· W2617941063 on OpenAlexafffundabout
D.L. Renaud, T.F. Duffield, S.J. LeBlanc, Derek B. Haley, D.F. Kelton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal health and immunology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsDairy Farmers of OntarioDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsMilkingColostrumBiosecurityHerdAnimal welfareLamenessHygieneVeterinary medicineAnimal scienceMedicineDemographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Morbidity, mortality, and antimicrobial use and resistance are major concerns in the rearing of male dairy calves, so information to support disease prevention is important. The objective of this cross-sectional study was to describe management practices associated with the care of male calves during their first days of life on Canadian dairy farms. A survey was completed by dairy producers across Canada between March 1 and April 30, 2015. The survey included 192 questions covering producer background, farm characteristics, biosecurity practices, disease prevalence, calf health, animal welfare, lameness, milking hygiene, reproduction, and Internet and social media use. A total of 1,025 surveys were completed online, by telephone, or by mail, representing 9% of all dairy farms in Canada. Five percent of respondents (n = 49) answered that they had euthanized at least 1 male calf at birth in the previous year, and blunt force trauma was commonly used in these cases. The majority of respondents always fed colostrum to male calves; however, 9% (n = 80) did not always feed colostrum. Almost 40% (n = 418) of respondents reported always dipping the navels of male calves, 12% (n = 123) vaccinated male calves, and 17% (n = 180) did not provide the same quantity of feed to male calves as heifer calves. The care of male calves differed greatly depending on the geographical region of the respondents. However, some regional effects may be confounded by economic conditions and the logistics of marketing male dairy calves in different parts of the country. Herd size was another important variable in many aspects of the management of male calves on dairy farms. Larger herd sizes were more likely to use an appropriate method of euthanasia at birth but were less likely to always feed colostrum to their male calves or feed them the same as female calves. Familiarity with the Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Dairy Cattle (National Farm Animal Care Council) by respondents was associated with better care of male calves on dairy farms. The results of this survey suggest that the treatment of male dairy calves on Canadian dairy farms varies and that there are opportunities to improve the health management of male calves on the farms of origin.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations89
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicAnimal health and immunologyFrench-language works237,207