MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955059501 · doi:10.1093/tas/txz107

Benchmarking calving management practices on western Canada cow–calf operations1

2019· article· en· W2955059501 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Animal Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal health and immunology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Calgary
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaBeef Cattle Research CouncilAlberta Agriculture and ForestryUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsBenchmarkingIce calvingCow-calfAnimal scienceBusinessBiologyLactationPregnancyHerdMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Benchmarking current calving management practices and herd demographics in the western Canadian cow–calf production system helps to fill the gap in knowledge and understanding of how this production system works. Further investigation into the relationships between management decisions and calf health may guide the development of management practices and protocols to improve calf health, especially in compromised calves after a difficult birth. Therefore, the objectives of this cross-sectional study were to describe current calving management practices on western Canadian cow–calf ranches and to investigate the association of herd demographics with herd-level incidence of calving assistance, morbidity, mortality, and use of calving and colostrum management practices. Cow–calf producers were surveyed in January 2017 regarding herd inventory and management practices during the 2016 calving season. Ninety-seven of 110 producers enrolled in the western Canadian Cow-Calf Surveillance Network responded. Average herd-level incidence of assisted calvings was 4.9% (13.5% heifers, 3.2% cows), stillbirths was 2.1% (3.3% heifers, 1.9% cows), preweaning mortality was 4.5%, and preweaning treatment for disease was 9.4% (3.0% neonatal calf diarrhea, 3.8% bovine respiratory disease, 2.6% other diseases). Greater than 90% of producers assisted calvings and would intervene with colostrum consumption if the calf did not appear to have nursed from its dam. Late calving herds (i.e., started calving in March or later) had significantly lower average herd-level incidence of assistance, treatment for disease, and mortality (P < 0.05). In earlier calving herds (i.e., started calving in January or February) producers had shorter intervals between checking on dams for signs of calving or intervening to assist with a calving (P < 0.05). In early calving herds, producers were more likely to perform hands-on colostrum management techniques such as placing the cow and calf together or feeding stored, frozen colostrum (P < 0.05). There were no associations between herd size and herd-level incidences or management techniques (P > 0.05). This study suggests that in western Canada earlier calving herds are more intensively managed, whereas later calving herds are more extensively managed. Herd demographics may be important to consider when investigating factors associated with management strategies, health, and productivity in cow–calf herds.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.395
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.298 · 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