MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163661174 · doi:10.3168/jds.2020-19705

Association of estrous expression detected by an automated activity monitoring system within 40 days in milk and reproductive performance of lactating Holstein cows

2021· article· en· W3163661174 on OpenAlexaff
S. Borchardt, C.M. Tippenhauer, J.-L. Plenio, Alexander Bartel, A.M.L. Madureira, R.L.A. Cerri, W. Heuwieser

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstrous cycleIce calvingAnimal scienceHerdArtificial inseminationDairy cattleInseminationBiologyLactationMedicinePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this observational study was to evaluate the association of estrous expression within 40 days in milk (DIM) using a neck-mounted automated activity monitor (Heatime Pro; SCR Engineers Ltd.) with reproductive performance in lactating Holstein cows. A total of 2,077 cows (614 primiparous cows and 1,463 multiparous cows) from 5 commercial dairy farms were included in the statistical analyses. Activity data from the first 7 d after calving were excluded. An estrus event was defined as an activity change index ≥35 for more than 2 h. Cows were classified according to the number of estrus events from d 7 until d 40 postpartum into 3 categories: (1) no estrus event (Estrus0); (2) one estrus event (Estrus1), and (3) 2 or more estrus events (Estrus2). Generalized linear mixed models were used to analyze continuous and categorical data. Shared frailty models were used for time to event data. Overall, 52.7% of cows had no estrus event detected by an automated activity monitor system from d 7 until d 40 postpartum. Herd level prevalence of Estrus0 ranged from 37.5 to 58.4%. Estrous expression from d 7 until d 40 postpartum affected estrous duration and estrous intensity at first artificial insemination (AI). Cows in Estrus0 had the shortest duration (13.2 ± 0.33 h) compared with cows in Estrus1 (13.8 ± 0.36 h) and Estrus2 (14.8 ± 0.41 h). Cows in Estrus2 had a longer estrous duration at first postpartum AI compared with cows in Estrus1. Among Estrus0 cows, 46.2% had an estrus event with high intensity at first postpartum AI. Among cows in Estrus1 and Estrus2, 50.8 and 53.8% had an estrus event with high intensity at first postpartum AI, respectively. There was a significant difference between Estrus2 and Estrus0 and a tendency between Estrus0 and Estrus1. There was no difference between Estrus1 and Estrus2. For Estrus0, Estrus1, and Estrus2 cows, pregnancy per AI was 29.4, 30.9, and 37.8%, respectively. There was a significant difference between Estrus0 and Estrus2 and Estrus1 and Estrus2. There was no difference between Estrus0 and Estrus1. Estrous expression from d 7 until d 40 postpartum affected time to first AI and time to pregnancy. Compared with Estrus0 cows, cows in Estrus1 [hazard risk (HR) = 1.74] and Estrus2 (HR = 1.77) had an increased hazard of being inseminated within 100 DIM. There was no difference between Estrus1 and Estrus2. Median DIM to first AI were 70, 59, and 58 for cows in Estrus0, Estrus1, and Estrus2, respectively. Compared with Estrus0 cows, cows in Estrus1 (HR = 1.28) and Estrus2 (HR = 1.33) had an increased hazard of becoming pregnant within 200 DIM. There was no difference between Estrus1 and Estrus2. Median DIM to pregnancy were 127, 112, and 103 for Estrus0 cows, Estrus1 and Estrus2, respectively. In conclusion, cows with no estrous expression from 7 to 40 DIM had reduced estrous expression at first AI and inferior reproductive performance compared with cows that displayed estrous activity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations36
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicReproductive Physiology in LivestockFrench-language works237,207