MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795012366 · doi:10.3168/jds.2017-14361

Short communication: Pair housing dairy calves in modified calf hutches

2018· article· en· W2795012366 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Whalin, Daniel M. Weary, M.A.G. von Keyserlingk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal scienceStarterNeophobiaBody weightBiologyVeterinary medicineMedicineFood scienceEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to test if body weight (BW) and starter intake increased and reaction to novelty decreased for preweaning Holstein heifer calves pair housed in modified hutches (n = 8 pairs) versus individually housed in a single hutch (n = 14 calves). Calves were alternately assigned to housing treatment at d 5 of age. Cross sucking was recorded in 5-min scans for 30 min after milk feeding once per week over 14 wk. Calf health and BW were measured weekly from birth until approximately 88 d. When calves were 60 d old they underwent a food neophobia test where they were exposed to a novel feed for the first time. Cross sucking was observed only 5 times (in 4 different pairs) over the entire milk-feeding period. Pair-housed calves ate more starter than individually housed calves [0.89 (0.72-1.08) vs. 0.48 (0.42-0.56) kg/d; median and confidence interval], these calves also consumed 2.6 times more novel feed in the neophobia test (150 ± 27 vs. 58 ± 20 g/30 min). We observed no effect of treatment on BW. We concluded that social housing in modified hutches promotes solid feed intake and decreases fearfulness in dairy calves.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations45
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207