Total and Differential Cell Counts as a Tool to Identify Intramammary Infections in Cows after Calving
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Milk differential somatic cells count (DSCC), made possible under field conditions by the recent availability of a high-throughput milk analyzer may represent an improvement in mastitis diagnosis. While an increasing number of studies reports data on DSCC on individual cow samples, very few concerns DSCC from quarter milk samples. This paper reports for the first time the results of a retrospective study aiming to assess the performance of total (SCC), DSCC, and a novel calculated marker (PLCC) measured on quarter milk samples as a method to identify cows at risk for intramammary infection (IMI) in the first 30 days after calving. Overall, 14,586 valid quarter milk samples (3658 cows) taken in the first 30 days of lactation were considered. Quarters with major pathogens (MP) IMI, as expected, showed significantly higher means for SCC, DSCC, and PLCC. The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the diagnosis based on different cut-offs calculated by ROC analysis are relatively close among DSCC, PLCC, and SCC (up to cut-off of 200,000 cells/mL). However, decision-tree analysis which includes the costs of analysis, but also the costs of the actions taken after test results showed as PLCC has the lowest cost among the three markers, and PLCC and SCC are cost effective when MP prevalence is higher than 6-10%. This diagnostic approach is of high interest particularly when selective dry cow therapy is applied to improve animal health at the herd level.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".