MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2891652289 · doi:10.3168/jds.2018-14519

Associations between the general condition of culled dairy cows and selling price at Ontario auction markets

2018· article· en· W2891652289 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Allison K.G. Moorman, T.F. Duffield, Michael A. Godkin, D.F. Kelton, Jeffrey Rau, Derek B. Haley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsUniversity of Guelph
FundersOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsDairy Farmers of OntarioBeef Farmers of OntarioUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsCullingUdderBreedHerdDairy cattleAnimal scienceMedicineBusinessVeterinary medicineBiologyMastitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dairy cows are culled from the herd for a variety of reasons, the most common being fertility problems, low milk production, or udder problems. Disease and injury can contribute to the decision to cull either directly, or indirectly, by causing fertility or production problems, leading to culling. Disease or injury may also affect the cow's ability to handle the stress of transportation and may increase the risk for reduced welfare. The purpose of this study was to determine the general condition of culled dairy cows sold at Ontario auction markets, to quantify the frequency of culled cows in poor condition sold at these auctions, and to determine how this relates to the sale price of the cow. Data were collected on 4,460 culled dairy cows, sold at 3 Ontario auction markets, over a continuous 16-wk study period. Observers assessed the general condition of dairy cows entering the sales ring by recording each individual cow's hock injury score, body condition score (BCS), gait score, and tail score, in accordance with 2017 Canadian proAction Animal Care guidelines. Each cow's body weight, breed, and sale price were also recorded. Results showed that 27.2% of culled cows scored had unacceptable hock injuries, 40.5% had a BCS ≤2, 72.7% had an abnormal gait, and 12.5% had docked tails. Culled cows with a BCS ≤2 sold for $0.20 less/kg compared with those with a BCS >2, which equated to an overall average loss of $117 per cow. Cows with an abnormal gait sold for $0.05 less/kg compared with culled cows with a normal gait, which equated to an overall average loss of $32.45 per cow. There was no difference in the sale price depending on hock injury score or the presence or absence of a full tail. The main issues identified in this study were the high prevalence of low body condition and abnormal gait, indicating that the welfare of these cows may be at risk. Additionally, cows with low BCS or abnormal gait sold for a lower price compared with cows that were in good condition, leading to reduced potential profit for the producer.

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)0.002
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 score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations26
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy Science→Same topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies→French-language works237,207→