Prevalence, risk factors, and economic costs of beef cattle lameness in southern Alberta feedlots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lameness, an important health and welfare concern with negative impacts on production, performance, and profitability of feedlot cattle is a multi-faceted issue that is not fully understood. Objectives were to identify the prevalence of lameness, related risk factors, explore associations between BRD and lameness, and estimate net return of various lameness diagnoses. Estimated lameness prevalence was 32% (range, 1.3 to 46%) from cattle health records at 28 feedlots from 2005 to 2015. Fall-placed calves were more at risk of lameness with no swelling compared to yearling cattle that were at risk of foot rot diagnosis. Heifers were at a higher risk of lameness compared to steer cattle types. Cattle with chronic lameness were at a higher risk of subsequently developing BRD. Furthermore, cattle with joint infections and lameness with no swelling had negative returns of $-286 and $-701, respectively. Therefore, lameness was a common and costly disorder in Alberta feedlots.
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) | 0.001 | 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".