Invited review: Academic and applied approach to evaluating longevity in dairy cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In its simplest form, longevity is defined as the ability to live a long life. Within the dairy industry, longevity has been defined and measured in many different ways, and the aim of this review is to disentangle the definitions and provide some clarity. Using a more standardized approach for defining and measuring longevity, both in academic discussions and on-farm application, we suggest using herd life (days) for time from birth until culling, and length of productive life (days) for time from first calving until culling. Despite identified benefits of extending the length of productive life, global trends in the time spent by dairy cattle in the herd have mostly been negative. Factors influencing herd life, such as health, rearing, environmental conditions, and management, are often ignored when longevity goals are evaluated, thereby underestimating the effect these factors have on defining overall longevity. Also, production efficiency, herd profitability, and welfare are not necessarily served by the longest life but rather by the optimized length of herd life instead. The majority of research has focused on the role of genetics on longevity. In this review, we provide insight into influences affecting dairy cow herd life as well as farm- and cow-level factors associated herewith. Finally, we suggest using herd life, including reproduction, production, health, and youngstock performance, for farm-level evaluation and length of productive life for time spent in the lactating herd.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".