MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889004993 · doi:10.3168/jds.2018-14680

Canadian National Dairy Study: Heifer calf management

2018· article· en· W2889004993 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Charlotte B. Winder, C.A. Bauman, T.F. Duffield, Herman W. Barkema, Greg Keefe, J. Dubuc, Fabienne D. Uehlinger, D.F. Kelton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEffects of Environmental Stressors on Livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward IslandUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversité de MontréalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Guelph
FundersMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsColostrumIce calvingAnimal scienceBiologyMedicineVeterinary medicinePregnancyLactation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the past decade, substantial changes have occurred in the way dairy heifer calves are managed. The objectives of this study, part of phase I of the 2015 Canadian National Dairy Study, were to examine heifer calf health and adoption of rearing practices, and to explore factors associated with different rearing strategies on Canadian dairy farms. The questionnaire was open to all licensed dairy producers in Canada and had a 12% response rate (n = 1,373). Fifty-one percent of respondents reported never allowing heifer calves to nurse their dam, and 17% always removed calves within 30 min of birth. Sixty-seven percent reported always feeding heifer calves 4 L of colostrum within 12 h of birth; 17% always fed colostrum between 2100 and 0400 h; 5% pasteurized all colostrum fed on farm. Seventy-seven percent of respondents reported calving and stillbirth information for 2014; the mean reported stillbirth rate was 4.9% (SD = 3.3). Forty percent housed calves in individual pens, 34% in group pens, 21% in individual hutches, 2% reported tethering calves, and 1% used group hutches. Of those who housed calves in groups, 59% reported a maximum group size of 3 to 10 calves, 31% reported a pair (2) of calves per pen or hutch, and 10% reported a group >10 calves. The maximum amount of milk offered to calves per day during the preweaned period was a mean of 8 L (SD = 3). Fifty percent of respondents reported mortality data for 2014; mean preweaning mortality was 6.4% (SD = 8.3), and postweaning mortality was 2.4% (SD = 4.4). Over 95% of producers reported disbudding practices; 86% used cautery, 11% used surgical amputation, and 9% used caustic paste. Twenty-eight percent reported disbudding at less than 3 wk of age, 60% at 3 to 8 wk, and 22% at 8 to 16 wk; 5% of respondents reported dehorning at more than 16 wk of age. Sixty-six percent of cautery users reported use of local anesthetic, 33% used sedation, and 25% used a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID). Multivariable regression models showed that the use of local anesthetic when disbudding calves was associated with social media activity (odds ratio = 2.3) and high-speed internet access (odds ratio = 2.0), whereas sedation was associated with geographic region, and NSAID use was associated with disbudding at more than 3 wk of age. Exploring heifer rearing management practices, including adoption of best practices, may help focus future education and extension efforts. Poor reporting of mortality data may reflect a lack of recordkeeping on farm.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations92
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicEffects of Environmental Stressors on LivestockFrench-language works237,207