MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2742255280 · doi:10.3168/jds.2016-12160

Daily lying behavior of lactating Holstein cows during an estrus synchronization protocol and its associations with fertility

2017· article· en· W2742255280 on OpenAlexafffund
B.F. Silper, A.M.L. Madureira, Liam Polsky, Sergi Soriano, A.F. Sica, J.L.M. Vasconcelos, R.L.A. Cerri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMitacsCiência sem FronteirasConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsEstrous cycleAnimal scienceArtificial inseminationInseminationOvulationPregnancyMedicineInternal medicineBiologyAndrologySpermHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives were to quantify lying behavior (LB) during an estradiol and progesterone-based synchronization protocol, to assess risk factors for ovulation, pregnancy per AI (P/AI), and degree of behavioral change at estrus, and to investigate the associations between estrus LB and walking activity. Holstein cows (43.6 ± 11.0 kg of milk/d) were fitted with leg-mounted accelerometers. Total lying time/d (L_time), bout frequency (bout_N), average lying bout duration, and relative increase in walking activity (ACT%) were evaluated for 1,411 timed artificial insemination events. The day with lowest L_time or bout_N among d -2, -1, and 0 (day of timed artificial insemination) determined the day of behavioral estrus. The variables L_time% and bout_N% represent relative ratios between lowest L_time and baseline (d -7), L_time, and lowest bout_N, and baseline (d -7) bout_N, respectively [e.g., (lowest L_time/baseline L_time) × 100]. Correlation coefficients between L_time% and bout_N% and ACT% were -0.38 and -0.31, respectively. Estrus LB change was considered large if <75% of baseline and small if ≥75% of baseline for both L_time% and bout_N%; average lying bout duration did not change with estrus. Lowest L_time% and bout_N% corresponded to, respectively, 65 ± 21% (mean ± standard deviation; 447 ± 157 min/d) and 65 ± 24% (8.5 ± 4.0 bouts/d) of baseline. The change in L_time% at estrus was smaller when cows had milk yield above average; the change in bout_N% was smaller among multiparous cows and for estrus occurring in the colder season. Likelihood of ovulation was greater when there was larger change in L_time% [odds ratio = 4.9; ovulation rate = 93 (large change) and 76% (small change)], as well as when a corpus luteum was present at start of protocol (odds ratio = 3.6; in the model with L_time%). Likelihood of pregnancy at d 32 was 1.6 times greater for estrus with large change in LB [L_time% or bout_N%; P/AI = 34% (large change in L_time%) and 26% (small change in L_time%)]. Among estrus events with ACT% ≥300% (high intensity), classification by small or large L_time% did not influence P/AI at 32 d. The magnitude of LB change at estrus and its association with fertility suggest potential application toward improved use of activity monitors (e.g., increased estrus detection, fertility prediction). The contribution of LB to accuracy of estrus detection when physical activity is known remains to be addressed. The relationship between intensity of estrus expression and fertility requires further investigations of its physiological rationale and on-farm applications.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations35
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicReproductive Physiology in LivestockFrench-language works237,207