MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3202078306 · doi:10.1093/jas/skab235.025

27 Machine Learning Algorithms Based on Haplotype Libraries for Classification of Stillbirth Susceptibility in Holstein Cows

2021· article· en· W3202078306 on OpenAlexaff
Pablo Augusto de Souza Fonseca, Massimo Tornatore, Ángela Cánovas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrahmanPercentileSingle-nucleotide polymorphismAnimal scienceHerdDairy cattleHaplotypeAlgorithmMathematicsMachine learningArtificial intelligenceBiologyStatisticsComputer scienceGeneticsBreedGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Reduced fertility is one of the main causes of economic losses in dairy farms. The cost of a stillbirth is estimated in US$ 938 per case in Holstein herds. Machine learning (ML) is gaining popularity in the livestock sector as a mean to identify hidden patterns and due to its potential to address dimensionality problems. Here we investigate the application of ML algorithms for the prediction of cows with higher stillbirth susceptibility in two scenarios: cows with >25% and >33.33% of stillbirths among birth records. These thresholds correspond to percentiles 75 (still_75) and 90 (still_90), respectively. A total of 10,570 cows and 50,541 birth records were collected to perform a haplotype-based genome-wide association study. Five-hundred significant pseudo single nucleotide polymorphisms (pseudo-SNPs) (False-Discovery Rate< 0.05) were used as input features of ML-based predictions to determine if the cow is in the top-75 and top-90 percentiles. Table 1 shows the classification performance of the investigated ML and linear models. The ML models outperformed linear models for both thresholds. In general, still_75 showed higher F1 values compared to still_90, suggesting a lower misclassification ratio when a less stringent threshold is used. We observe that accuracy of the models in our study is higher when compared to ML-based prediction accuracies in other breeds, e.g. compared to the accuracies of 0.46 and 0.67 that were achieved using SNPs for body weight in Brahman and fertility traits in Nellore, respectively. Xgboost algorithm shows the highest balanced accuracy (BA; 0.625), F1-score (0.588) and area under the curve (AUC; 0.688), suggesting that xgboost can achieve the highest predictive performance and the lowest difference in misclassification ratio between classes. The ML applied over haplotype libraries is an interesting approach for the detection of animals with higher susceptibility to stillbirths due to highest predictive accuracy and relatively lower misclassification ratio.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal Science→Same topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock→French-language works237,207→