MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788322586 · doi:10.3168/jds.2017-14021

A randomized controlled trial on the effect of incomplete milking during the first 5 days in milk on culling hazard and on milk production and composition of dairy cows

2018· article· en· W2788322586 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Catarina Krug, Pauline Morin, P. Lacasse, D.E. Santschi, Jean‐Philippe Roy, J. Dubuc, Simon Dufour

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsValacta (Canada)Cégep de SherbrookeUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNovalait
KeywordsCullingMilkingAnimal scienceHerdIce calvingLactationDairy cattleMilk productionHazard ratioBiologyMedicineConfidence intervalPregnancyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An incomplete milking in early lactation could help limit negative energy balance in dairy cattle, but its potential effects on culling hazard and on milk production and composition throughout the entire lactation are unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of an incomplete milking during the first 5 d in milk on culling hazard, milk weight, milk fat and protein concentrations, and energy-corrected milk (ECM) yield during the whole lactation. A randomized controlled trial was conducted in 13 dairy farms near St-Hyacinthe, Quebec, Canada. Approximately 1 mo before expected calving, Holstein multiparous cows calving between December 2013 and March 2015 (n = 846 cow lactations) were randomly assigned to a control or a treatment group. Cows in the control group were milked conventionally, whereas cows in the treatment group were submitted to an incomplete milking protocol (maximum of 10, 12, and 14 L/d of milk was collected on days in milk 1-3, 4, and 5, respectively). All farms were registered on Dairy Herd Improvement Association, which was used to obtain records on culling, monthly milk yield, and milk fat and protein concentrations. In addition, daily milk yield records were available for 6 farms. A Cox proportional hazards model with a herd frailty term was fitted to the data to compare culling hazard among treatment groups. Regarding milk production and composition, 4 linear mixed models with herd as a fixed effect, cow as a random effect, and using an autoregressive covariance structure were used to study the effect of the incomplete milking on (1) milk weight, (2) milk fat concentration, (3) milk protein concentration, and (4) ECM yield. Culling hazard did not differ among treatment groups (hazard ratio = 1.0; 95% CI = 0.82, 1.3). We observed no differences in milk weight, milk fat, or protein concentration among treatment groups between weeks in milk (WIM) 2 and 44 (the studied period). We noted a difference in ECM between treatment groups for WIM 38, with incompletely milked cows producing less milk than conventionally milked cows (-2.7 kg/d; 95% CI = -0.02, -5.2 kg/d), but no differences were found for any of the other WIM. These results suggest that this strategy for controlling the negative energy balance has negligible effect on cow productivity.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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