Association between aggressive behaviour and high-energy feeding level in beef cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate an association between aggressiveness and high level of feeding in a half-open feedlot production system. An experiment was conducted on 72 head of beef cattle of different breeds. The animals were at about 10 months of age. Medium quality silage was offered ad libitum and supplemented with high (HE) and low level (LE) of barley (2.5 and 1.5 kg/day/head, respectively) and supplemented without (nil) or with (+) extracted soybean meal (0.45 kg/day/head). Several types of animal behaviour were observed such as those parameters that are categorized to be main aggressive behaviours, butting, being butted, mounting and being mounted. Significant differences (P < 0.05) were found in butting, being butted behaviours between HE and LE treatment groups. Mounting and being mounted behaviours were significantly different (P < 0.05) in steers and heifers and between the seasons as well. Steers performed more incidents of mounting behaviour than heifers and it was the same for spring, during which animals had more mounting behaviours. It was concluded that there was a close relationship between high-energy diets and aggressive behaviour, which necessitates some management measures to be taken in order to ensure better animal welfare and beef production.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".