Assessment of ergot (<i>Claviceps purpurea</i>) exposure in pregnant and postpartum beef cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cows were fed ration for 9 wk containing 5, 48, 201, and 822 μg kg −1 ergot alkaloids. The objective was to evaluate the impact of ergot consumption in beef cow–calf operations. Ergot alkaloids up to 822 μg kg −1 did not alter the weight of peripartum and postpartum beef cows (P = 0.93) or nursing calves (P = 0.08), rectal temperature (P = 0.16), or plasma prolactin concentrations (P = 0.30) at moderate ambient temperatures. Ergot did not influence the time (>1 ng mL −1 ; P = 0.79) or the progesterone concentration (P = 0.38) at the time of first postpartum rise or the size of the first (14 ± 0.6 mm; P = 0.40) and second (13 ± 0.5 mm; P = 0.41) follicles to ovulate. The maximum size of the first postpartum corpus luteum (CL) was 4 mm larger in the 822 μg kg −1 ergot group compared with the control (P = 0.03) for the first ovulation post partum, but not for the second (P = 0.11). There was no effect of ergot exposure on the number of days until the appearance of the first (43 ± 4 d; P = 0.95) or second (52 ± 4 d; P = 0.98) CL post partum. Ergot alkaloid concentrations up to 822 μg kg −1 did not affect pregnancy rates (X 2 = 0.36). In conclusion, ergot alkaloid exposure for 9 wk to concentrations as high as 822 μg kg −1 did not alter performance in pregnant and postpartum beef cattle at moderate ambient temperatures.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".