Efficacy of Copper Supplementation in the Prevention of Molybdenosis in Cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Revegetation and sustainable cattle grazing are major objectives in the reclamation of mine tailings at the Highland Valley Copper mine in British Columbia, Canada. A total of 150 cows with their calves grazed forage extremely high in molybdenum (Mo) for 5-6 weeks in the summer and fall for 3 consecutive years (2002-2004). The average stocking rate was 0.89 ha per animal unit month. The animals’ diet consisted primarily of alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) and orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.) containing 100-400 ppm Mo. Each year, the herd was divided into 2 groups of approximately 25 cow-calf pairs. One group was supplemented with 2.5% copper sulphate (CuSO4 5H2O) in loose salt, and the other group was only given loose salt. Clinical signs of Mo toxicity, including lameness, diarrhea, and a faded hair coat, were significantly reduced in the supplement cows compared to control cows, which demonstrated the efficacy of the copper supplement treatment. Cattle also developed a tolerance to grazing high-Mo forage, as lameness and diarrhea were reduced in cows that had previous exposure to the site. However, lameness, the primary sign, and diarrhea were resolved in all cows by the end of each trial without treatment and hair coats returned to normal by the following spring. Only 4 calves showed signs of lameness or diarrhea in the 3-year study. Cattle grazing is a viable option for the end land use plan for Highland Valley Copper, provided a CuSO4 5H2O supplement is available to counteract the toxic effects of the high-Mo forage. As well, animals with previous exposure to the site should be utilized, as they appear to develop a tolerance to the Mo in the forage.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".