Categorical Visual Score Traits of a Nellore Beef Cattle Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Variance components and genetic parameters of economically relevant traits in livestock, whether continuous or categorical, can be estimated by methods computationally available providing support for the selection and mating of animals in breeding programs. The objectives of this paper were to obtain and compare the variance components estimates for visual traits under continuous or categorical distribution in single-trait analysis and their correlations with continuous productive traits in two-trait analysis. Data of conformation (CONF), precocity of fat deposition (PREC) and muscling (MUSC) visual scores evaluated at 18 months of age as well as the weight at 18 months of age (YW) were collected from animals born from 2000 to 2012, in Nellore cattle herds raised in Southeastern and Central Western tropical regions of Brazil. Methods III of Henderson, Restricted Maximum Likelihood (REML), Bayesian Inference and generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) were tested. Variance components obtained from single-trait analysis were similar to those obtained from two-trait analysis. The estimates of heritability (h2) for the visual scores ranged from 0.1081 to 0.2190. Heritability estimates for traits evaluated by visual scores have moderate to high magnitude justifying the inclusion of visual scores as selection criteria in animal breeding and the selection of animals with higher scores for mating. High genetic correlations between yearling weight and morphological traits were verified. For visual scores of conformation, precocity and muscling, the most suitable model based on one-trait or two-trait analyses considered an animal model, a linear distribution of the data and the estimation method of the components of (co)variance based on Bayesian methodology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".