Pre-farrow enrichment with burlap sheet: potential benefit for sow performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Burlap has been proposed as an enrichment option for the conventional farrowing crate environment. Our objectives were to determine if burlap sheets hung in farrowing crates were used by sows and piglets and had any effect on farrowing and litter performance. Before sow entry, a sterilized burlap sheet (165 cm × 60 cm) was attached to every second farrowing crate so that it hung to the floor with easy animal access. Its length was measured immediately after farrowing and weaning. Routine sow and litter information from farrowing to weaning (day 18) were recorded. Complete data were analyzed for mixed-parity sows and litters with burlap (BURL; n = 277) and without burlap (CTRL; n = 277). Sows and their litters manipulated the burlap sheet to varying degrees. The BURL sows had a lower percentage of stillbirths (6.5% vs. 8.3%, BURL vs. CTRL, SE 0.4; P = 0.004), although there was only a trend towards more born alive (13.00 vs. 12.54, SE 0.25; P = 0.113). More piglets were fostered off BURL sows (8.4 vs. 7.1, SE 0.5; P = 0.049). No significant differences were apparent for other sow and litter measurements. Burlap sheets as a farrowing crate enrichment have potential to improve sow and litter performance.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".