Buenas Prácticas Ganaderas en Establos Lecheros
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolLa investigacion se llevo a cabo en los establos: San Isidro Labrador, ubicado en Herbay Alto - Canete, y el establo La Molina de la Unidad Experimental de Zootecnia (UEZ), pertenecientes a la Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina; para recolectar informacion se realizaron encuestas con 98 preguntas aplicadas por dos ocasiones; en agosto del 2016 y marzo del 2017. Para elaborar la encuesta se tomo como base la guia de Buenas practicas en explotaciones lecheras de la FAO-FIL; que permitio evaluar temas de sanidad animal, higiene en el ordeno, nutricion, bienestar animal, medio ambiente y gestion socioeconomica, actividades relacionadas con las buenas practicas ganaderas aplicadas en los establos. Los resultados obtenidos con relacion a la higiene del ordeno en la primera evaluacion fueron del 93.3% en ambos establos, al realizarse la segunda evaluacion el cumplimiento fue total con el 100% en los dos establos. Sin embargo, el aspecto relacionado con la nutricion fue el mas bajo en cuanto a cumplimiento con un 69.2% para el Establo San Isidro Labrador, y un 61.5% para el establo La Molina, valores obtenidos tanto en la primera como en la segunda evaluacion. En lo referente a bienestar animal, el establo San Isidro Labrador en la primera evaluacion presento un cumplimiento de 86.3%, en la segunda se evidencio una mejoria con un 95.4%, en caso del establo lechero La Molina en la primera evaluacion tuvo 90.9% de cumplimiento y en la segunda 95.4% de cumplimiento. La gestion socioeconomica tanto en la primera y segunda evaluacion en el establo San Isidro Labrador como en el establo La Molina se cumplieron en un 81.8%. Sobre sanidad animal en la primera evaluacion el establo San Isidro cumplio en un 71.4% y el establo La Molina 78.6%, en la segunda evaluacion el establo San Isidro Labrador y el establo La Molina presentaron un porcentaje de cumplimiento de 82.1%. Referente a medio ambiente en ambas evaluaciones realizadas al establo San Isidro Labrador y al establo La Molina presentan un 77.7% de cumplimiento. En la segunda evaluacion realizada a los establos se nota una mejora significativa en higiene del ordeno cumpliendose en un 100%. EnglishThe investigation was carried out in the stables: San Isidro Labrador, located in Herbay Alto - Canete, and the La Molina stable of the Experimental Animal Husbandry Unit (UEZ), belonging to the National Agrarian University La Molina; to collect information, surveys were conducted with 98 questions applied twice; in August 2016 and March 2017. In order to elaborate the survey, the guide of Good Practices in Dairy Farms of FAO-FIL was taken as a basis; which allowed evaluating animal health issues, milking hygiene, nutrition, animal welfare, environment and socio-economic management, activities related to good livestock practices applied in the stables. The results obtained in relation to milking hygiene in the first evaluation was of 93.3% in both stables, when the second evaluation was carried out, the total compliance was 100% in the two stables. However, the aspect related to nutrition was the lowest in terms of compliance with 69.2% for the San Isidro Labrador stable, and 61.5% for the La Molina stable, values obtained both in the first and in the second evaluation. Regarding animal welfare, the San Isidro Labrador stable in the first evaluation showed a compliance of 86.3%, in the second one an improvement was evidenced with 95.4%, in the case of the milk stable La Molina in the first evaluation had 90.9% compliance and in the second 95.4% compliance. Socioeconomic management in both the first and second evaluations in the San Isidro Labrador stable and in the La Molina stable were fulfilled in 81.8%. Regarding animal health in the first evaluation, the stable San Isidro complied with 71.4% and the stable La Molina 78.6%, in the second evaluation the stable San Isidro Labrador and the stable La Molina presented a compliance percentage of 82.1%. Regarding the environment, both evaluations carried out at the San Isidro Labrador stable and the La Molina stable presented a 77.7% compliance. In the second evaluation made to the stables, a significant improvement in milking hygiene is observed, which is complete in 100%. Key words:
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".