MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980970384 · doi:10.1093/jas/skz324

Relationships between temperament, meat quality, and carcass traits in Nellore cattle1

2019· article· en· W2980970384 on OpenAlexaff
Aline Cristina Sant’Anna, Tiago da Silva Valente, Ana Fabrícia Braga Magalhães, Rafael Espigolan, Maria Camila Ceballos, Lúcia Galvão de Albuquerque, Mateus José Rodrigues Paranhos da Costa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsAlberta Livestock and Meat AgencyUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemperamentMarbled meatFeedlotAnimal scienceLongissimus muscleCarcass weightBiologyBody weightPsychologyPersonality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between temperament in Nellore bulls with carcass and meat quality traits. In total, 1,400 bulls were studied, and temperament was assessed using two measurements: movement score (MOV) and flight speed test (FS). Both MOV and FS were measured at two time points, with background (MOVb and FSb) temperament measured at yearling age, ~550 d after birth, and the preslaughter (MOVps and FSps) temperament measured at the end of the feedlot period. The change of temperament resulting in an increase or decrease in reactivity was also used to measure meat quality. The traits used to define carcass and meat quality included carcass bruises (BRU), hot carcass weight (HCW, kg), ribeye area (REA, cm2), backfat thickness (BFT, cm), marbling score (MS), meat pH after thawing (pH), presence or absence of dark cutters, color parameters of luminosity (L*), redness (a*) and yellowness (b*), cooking loss (CL, %), and Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBSF, kg). A principal component (PC) analysis was initially applied to the carcass and meat quality traits, followed by logistic regression models and linear mixed models to evaluate the effects of temperament on carcass and meat quality. The risks of carcass bruises and dark cutters did not differ as a function of any temperament trait (P > 0.05). In turn, animals classified as high MOVb (reactive) had lower PC3 values (P = 0.05), CL (P = 0.02), and tended to have lower MS (P = 0.08). In addition, animals classified as high FSb (faster and reactive cattle) produced carcasses with smaller REA (P < 0.01), higher meat pH (P < 0.01), lower color gradients (L*, P = 0.04; b*, P < 0.01), and lower PC1 and PC4 scores (P < 0.01) when compared with the low FSb class. For preslaughter temperament, high MOVps was related to lower color a* (P = 0.04), whereas high FSps was related to lower HCW, MS, and PC2 (P < 0.01) than the calmer ones (low FSps). The reduction in MOV was related to more tender meat, and the reduction in FS to heavier carcass and brighter meat. We conclude that excitable temperament in Nellore cattle may have negative effects in some of the carcass and meat quality attributes assessed, mainly those related to muscle deposition on carcass and color gradients. Measurement of temperament before the cattle entered the feedlot was a better predictor of carcass and meat quality traits, compared with temperament assessment at the end of the feeding period.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations35
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207