Genetic parameters for milk yield and quality traits of Brazilian Holstein cows as a function of temperature and humidity index
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Measurements of milk yield (MY), somatic cell score (SCS), percentage of fat (FP), protein (PP), lactose (LP), casein (CP) and percentage of palmitic (C16:0), stearic (C18:0), oleic (C18:1), total saturated (SFA), unsaturated (UFA), monounsaturated (MUFA) and polyunsaturated (PUFA) fatty acids in milk from 5,224 Holstein cows were evaluated as a function of a temperature and humidity index (THI). Legendre orthogonal polynomials from second to seventh order were tested. The best fit order for MY, PP and C18:0 was the third, whereas the second for all other traits. The heritability estimates decreased for MY (0.31 to 0.14), FP (0.28 to 0.16), LP (0.43 to 0.30), SCS (0.14 to 0.09), SFA (0.33 to 0.22) and C16:0 (0.31 to 0.26), whereas increased for CP (0.32 to 0.42), MUFA (0.08 to 0.13), UFA (0.07 to 0.11) and C18:1 (0.07 to 0.11) as the THI level increased. For PP, heritabilities (0.26 to 0.39) presented larger values in intermediate THI. For PUFA and C18:0, heritabilities were approximately constant (0.13 to 0.14 and 0.15, respectively). However, the greatest variations may have been the result of the limitations of Legendre polynomials at the extreme points of the curve, and the pattern of heritabilities curves was approximately constant for the evaluated traits. Spearman's rank correlations between breeding values in extreme THI levels were greater than 0.80 for all traits considering all animals, only cows and only bulls. When considering the top 1% and the top 50% animals (only cows, only bulls and all), Spearman correlations smaller than 0.70 were found, suggesting reranking of the animals. Although there was little variation in the variance components over THI, it is possible that there is no heat stress in the animals studied, because, on average, there was no great impact of the thermal load on the traits. One possible explanation is the use of herds with little climatic difference among herds, as well as the use of fans and sprinklers into the barns. However, the THI levels may be important factors in the selection process, as reranking of animals was verified.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".