Urinary metabolomics fingerprinting around parturition identifies metabolites that differentiate lame dairy cows from healthy ones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lameness is a very important disorder of periparturient dairy cows with implications on milk production and composition as well as with consequences on reproductive performance. The aetiology of lameness is not clear although there have been various hypotheses suggested over the years. The objective of this study was to metabotype the urine of dairy cows prior to, during and after the onset of lameness by evaluating at weeks -8, -4 pre-calving, the week of lameness diagnosis, and +4 and +8 weeks post-calving. We used a metabolomics approach to analyse urine samples collected from dairy cows around calving (6 cows with lameness v. 20 healthy control cows). A total of 153 metabolites were identified and quantified using an in-house MS library and classified into 6 groups including: 11 amino acids (AAs), 39 acylcarnitines (ACs), 3 biogenic amines (BAs), 84 glycerophospholipids, 15 sphingolipids and hexose. A total of 23, 36, 40, 23 and 49 metabolites were observed to be significantly different between the lame and healthy cows at -8 and -4 weeks pre-calving, week of lameness diagnosis as well as at +4 and +8 weeks post-calving, respectively. It should be noted that most of the identified metabolites were elevated; however, a few of them were also lower in lame cows. Overall, ACs and glycerophospholipids, specifically phosphatidylcholines (PCs), were the metabolite groups displaying the strongest differences in the urine of pre-lame and lame cows. Lysophosphatidylcholines (LysoPCs), although to a lesser extent than PCs, were altered at all time points. Alterations in urinary AA concentrations were also observed during the current study for four time points. During the pre-calving period, there was an observed elevation of arginine (-8 week), tyrosine (-8 week) and aspartate (-4 week), as well as a depression of urinary glutamate (-4 weeks). In the current study, it was additionally observed that concentrations of several sphingomyelins and one BA were altered in pre-lame and lame cows. Symmetric dimethylarginine was elevated at both -8 weeks pre-calving and the week of lameness diagnosis. Data showed that urinary fingerprinting might be a reliable methodology to be used in the future to differentiate lame cows from healthy ones.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".