MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947640636 · doi:10.3168/jds.2018-16159

Short communication: Summer on-farm environmental condition assessments in Québec tiestall farms and adaptation of temperature-humidity index calculated with local meteorological data

2019· article· en· W2947640636 on OpenAlexafffundabout
V. Ouellet, A L Bellavance, Sébastien Fournel, Édith Charbonneau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEffects of Environmental Stressors on Livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistère de l'Agriculture et de l'AlimentationMinistère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'Alimentation
KeywordsBarnRelative humidityEnvironmental scienceInletAutomatic weather stationWeather stationMeteorologyData loggerHumidityHeat indexAir temperatureIndex (typography)Atmospheric sciencesGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Temperature-humidity index (THI) calculation following the equation developed by the National Research Council (A Guide to Environmental Research on Animals, 1971) requires ambient temperature (AT) and relative humidity (RH). Those data are widely and readily available at local meteorological stations. However, studies showed that using average AT and RH retrieved from the closest stations is not appropriate for estimating on-farm conditions. The present objectives were (1) to study summer on-farm environmental conditions, (2) to explore the relationship between summer THI calculated with on-farm data and summer THI calculated with local weather station data, and (3) to verify whether THI calculated with summer meteorological station data could be adapted to better represent summer on-farm conditions. Six tiestall dairy farms located in 2 regions of the province of Québec [Eastern Québec (EQ) and Southwestern Québec (SWQ)] were enrolled in this study. Within-barn conditions were monitored using 3 remote data loggers from August 2016 through August 2017. Two loggers were installed inside at varying distances relative to the ventilation inlet (L1: closest to inlet; L2: farthest from inlet) and a third was installed just outside of the barn (L3). Values retrieved from each logger and the closest local meteorological station were used to calculate daily THI according to the National Research Council formula and were ultimately compared. Our results showed that THI varied within the barn depending on the proximity relative to the inlet because THI measured by L1 was lower than THI measured by L2 in both regions. Moreover, our results showed that in both regions AT measured on-farm was consistently higher than AT measured at the weather station. The opposite was observed with RH, as it was significantly lower on-farm in EQ and numerically lower in SWQ compared with RH extracted from weather stations. Overall, this led to THI being lower by 4.6 and 3.7 units at the weather stations compared with within-barn conditions for EQ and SWQ farms, respectively. Hence, using local meteorological station data to estimate on-farm conditions would lead to an underestimation of heat stress level in dairy cows. Adapting THI calculations by including daily maximum AT and minimum RH retrieved from the local weather station instead of their average counterparts led to a better estimation of within-barn conditions. However, the difference between THI measured on-farm and the adapted THI calculated with weather station data remained significant. Although the adaption made to THI allowed for a closer relation to on-farm conditions, THI calculated with weather station data should only be used to assess heat stress level in dairy cows when heat stress thresholds are adapted for such data.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.239 · 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.

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

Citations22
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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