MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944042058 · doi:10.3168/jds.2018-15859

Housing tiestall dairy cows in deep-bedded pens during an 8-week dry period: Effects on lying time, lying postures, and rising and lying-down behaviors

2019· article· en· W2944042058 on OpenAlexafffund
Elise Shepley, G. Obinu, Thomas C. Bruneau, E. Vasseur

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversitySte. Anne's Hospital
FundersNovalaitDairy Farmers of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsMcGill University
KeywordsLyingAnimal scienceIce calvingLactationBiologyMedicinePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dairy cow lying behavior is useful in determining the cow's level of welfare, as well as in determining how her environment may affect her comfort and ease of movement. In tiestall systems, cows usually remain in a stall for the duration of their lactation. The dry period offers a unique opportunity to provide alternative housing to the cow with minimal effects on farm housing and management. Our objective was to determine whether housing tiestall cows in deep-bedded pens over an 8-wk dry period altered lying time, lying and rising ability, or lying postures. At dry-off, 20 cows, paired by parity and calving date, were randomly assigned to a deep-bedded loose pen (LP) or a tiestall (TS). Leg-mounted pedometers measured lying time. Rising and lying ability were measured using 6 events of rising and lying from 24-h video recordings taken once a week per cow. Sequenced images (1/min) from the 24-h recordings were used to document lying postures and locations for each cow. Data were analyzed for the early (first week of dry-off), mid, and late (week before calving) terms of the dry period. Lying time did not differ between LP and TS but was numerically higher for LP than TS cows (14.4 vs. 13.0 h/d, respectively). Contact with stall or pen confines when lying down was 5 times higher in TS than LP. The increased contact, coupled with a higher occurrence of hindquarter shifting in the late term, led to higher overall abnormal lying behaviors in TS. Contact with the stall upon rising increased in the late term for TS cows. Cows housed in loose pens also exhibited greater variation in hind-leg postures, keeping legs tucked 20% less often in favor of alternative postures. Stall hardware (e.g., tie rail, dividers) may have affected the ease of transition between lying and standing, leading to higher levels of contact with the stall. Loose-pen cows are able to assume more postures than TS cows when provided more space, possibly allowing them to orient themselves in ways that provide greater comfort. Lying surface in the deep-bedded loose pen may ease the cow's lying-down and rising movements and lead to the higher lying time found with LP cows. Overall, aspects of the stall largely contributed to differences in lying behaviors, warranting further study into whether freestall systems would yield similar outcomes. Improving our concept of ease of movement related to lying and quality of rest in dairy cows, through evaluating lying behaviors in different housing systems, allows for better recommendations on viable alternative housing options.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations25
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207