MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205747131 · doi:10.1093/jas/skab235.002

6 Does Bedding Influence Lying Behaviour of Cattle Unloaded for Rest During Long-distance Transportation?

2021· article· en· W3205747131 on OpenAlexaffabout
Paula Olivares Guzman, David L. Pearl, K. S. Schwartzkopf-Genswein, Tina M. Widowski, Daniela M Meléndez Suárez, Sònia Martí, Derek B. Haley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRest (music)Animal scienceAllowance (engineering)BeddingClawOddsBody weightLyingMathematicsFeeder cattleBiologyLogistic regressionEcologyMedicineOperations managementEngineeringStatisticsInternal medicineEndocrinologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In Canada, cattle must be unloaded, fed, watered, and rested after 36 h of transport; however, little is known about what constitutes appropriate rest station conditions. The objective of this study was to determine the relationship between providing straw bedding (14-cm deep) and trip, load, and commercial rest station characteristics, on lying behaviour. Truckloads (n = 13) were split; half the animals were assigned to either bedded (n = 452 cattle) or non-bedded (n = 470 cattle) pens. Trip characteristics [time in motion (TIM), duration of stops en route (DUR_STOPS)], load characteristics (sex: heifers, steers, both; and load weight), and rest station characteristics [ambient temperature at unloading; rest pen space allowance (k_PEN); time in resting pen (TIP)] were recorded. Once unloaded we counted the number of cattle lying/pen, every 10 min for 8 h. A mixed logistic regression model with random intercepts for load and truck compartment was fitted to examine associations between the proportion of animals lying and the independent variables (i.e., treatment, trip, load, and rest station characteristics). Odds of lying increased with load weight (i.e., cattle weight class, P = 0.02) and with DUR_STOPS (P < 0.03). There was an interaction (P < 0.01) between treatment and TIM: as TIM increased, the odds of observing cattle lying showed a notable increase for cattle rested in bedded pens, whereas for those rested in non-bedded pens, the odds showed little change as TIM increased. An interaction (P < 0.01) was also found between treatment and TIP: early in the observation period, the odds of cattle lying were greater in bedded pens. Both groups showed an increase in the probability of lying over time, plateauing at similar levels, near the end of the 8-h observation period. In conclusion, providing straw bedding at rest stations influenced cattle’s motivation to lie, particularly following longer transport durations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designObservational
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicAgriculture and Farm SafetyFrench-language works237,207