MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2811278299 · doi:10.3168/jds.2018-14487

Effects of milk replacer acidification and free-access feeding on early life feeding, oral, and lying behavior of dairy calves

2018· article· en· W2811278299 on OpenAlexafffundabout
C.G. Todd, Suzanne T. Millman, K.E. Leslie, Neil G. Anderson, Jan M. Sargeant, T.J. DeVries

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal health and immunology
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsUniversity of Guelph
FundersMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsDairy Farmers of OntarioUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsFree accessAnimal scienceMilk substituteBiologyFeeding behaviorDairy cattlePalatabilityDairy industryFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acidification is a practical way of preserving the bacteriological quality of milk so that it can be fed to calves under free-access conditions. The objectives of this study were to evaluate how milk replacer acidification and free-access feeding affect dairy calf behavior during the first week of life. Sixteen Holstein male calves were purchased at birth and transported to the University of Guelph Kemptville Campus Dairy Education and Research Centre. Calves were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 milk feeding programs: (1) free-access (ad libitum) feeding of acidified milk replacer (22% crude protein and 17% fat, 150 g/L; FA); (2) restricted (6 L/d, 150 g/L) feeding of acidified milk replacer (RA); (3) free-access feeding of nonacidified milk replacer (FN); and (4) restricted feeding of nonacidified milk replacer (RN). Formic acid was used to acidify milk replacer to a target pH between 4.0 and 4.5. Video recordings of each calf at 1, 2, and 6 d were analyzed continuously over 24 h for all occurrences of each behavior in the ethogram. Feeding behavior observations were organized into sucking bouts, from which feeding behavior outcome variables were calculated. Calves consuming acidified milk replacer demonstrated more fragmented feeding patterns, characterized by more pauses within a sucking bout (FA, FN, RA, and RN calves = 12.4, 4.4, 13.7, and 11.9 pauses/bout, respectively) and longer sucking bout duration (FA, FN, RA, and RN calves = 8.8, 5.2, 9.3, and 8.1 min/bout, respectively), than calves fed nonacidified milk replacer. Restricted-fed calves tended to have longer sucking bouts and performed more within-bout sucks (FA, FN, RA, and RN calves = 10.7, 5.8, 13.5, and 14.1, respectively) and pauses than free-access calves. Acidification and free-access feeding did not affect lying duration. Calves assigned to the acidified feeding treatments tended to perform more grooming behavior than those fed nonacidified milk replacer (FA, FN, RA, and RN calves = 0.9, 0.5, 0.8, and 0.6 h/d, respectively). Free-access feeding did not affect grooming duration. The observed differences in feeding and grooming behavior suggest that acidification to a pH between 4.0 and 4.5 may have altered the palatability of milk replacer. Calves assigned to the acidified milk replacer feeding treatments did not, however, show avoidance toward this feedstuff during the first week of life.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 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

Citations21
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicAnimal health and immunologyFrench-language works237,207