MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205955280 · doi:10.3168/jds.2021-20618

Farm-level factors associated with lameness prevalence, productivity, and milk quality in farms with automated milking systems

2021· article· en· W3205955280 on OpenAlexafffundabout
R. Matson, M.T.M. King, T.F. Duffield, D.E. Santschi, Karin Orsel, Edmond A. Pajor, G.B. Penner, T. Mutsvangwa, T.J. DeVries

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsSte. Anne's HospitalUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Guelph
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversidade Federal de ViçosaDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsMilkingLamenessHerdBarnAnimal scienceAutomatic milkingUdderVeterinary medicineDairy cattleMedicineProductivityBiologyMastitisLactationIce calvingGeographyPregnancySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Impaired locomotion (lameness) may negatively affect the ability and desire of cows to milk voluntarily, which is a key factor in success of automated milking systems (AMS). The objective of this study was to identify factors associated with herd-level lameness prevalence and associations of lameness and other farm-level factors with milking activity, milk yield, and milk quality in herds with AMS. From April to September 2019, 75 herds with AMS in Ontario, Canada, were visited, and data on barn design and farm management practices were collected. Data from AMS were collected, along with milk recording data, for the 6-mo period before farm visits. Farms averaged 98 ± 71 lactating cows, 2.3 ± 1.5 robot units/farm, 43.6 ± 9.4 cows/robot, 36.4 ± 4.9 kg/d of milk, a milking frequency of 3.01 ± 0.33 milkings/d, and a herd average geometric mean SCC of 179.3 ± 74.6 (× 1,000) cells/mL. Thirty percent of cows/farm (minimum of 30 cows/farm) were scored for body condition (1 = underconditioned to 5 = over conditioned) and locomotion (1 = sound to 5 = lame; clinically lame ≥3 out of 5 = 28.3 ± 11.7%, and severely lame ≥4 out of 5 = 3.0 ± 3.2%). Clinical lameness (locomotion score ≥3) was less prevalent on farms with sand bedding, with increased feed bunk space per cow, and on farms with non-Holstein breeds versus Holsteins, and tended to be less prevalent with lesser proportion of underconditioned cows (with body condition score ≤2.5). Severe lameness occurrence (farms with any cows with locomotion score ≥4) was associated with a greater proportion of underconditioned cows and in farms with stalls with greater curb heights. Herd average milk yield/cow per day increased with lesser prevalence of clinical lameness (each 10-percentage-point decrease in clinical lameness prevalence was associated with 2.0 kg/cow per day greater milk yield) and greater milking visit frequency per day, and tended to be greater with increased feed push-up frequency. Lesser herd average somatic cell count was associated with lesser clinical lameness prevalence, herd average days in milk, and proportion of overconditioned cows, and somatic cell count tended to be lesser for farms with sand bedding versus those with organic bedding substrates. The results highlight the importance of minimizing lameness prevalence, using of sand bedding, ensuring adequate feed access and feed bunk space, and maintaining proper cow body condition to optimize herd-level productivity and milk quality in AMS herds.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207