MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Toe tip necrosis in a Western Canadian feedlot steer

2010· article· en· W33478184 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Garth Cummings

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicMicrobial infections and disease research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeedlotBiologyAnimal science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As profit margins become smaller, North American beef producers rely on economies of scale and efficiency of production to remain economically viable. Morbidity and mortality of feedlot cattle adversely affect profitability through decreased performance of sick and dead animals, increased costs associated with treatment, increased cost of feed consumed by animals that die prematurely, and loss of the animal’s purchase price, the latter being the single largest cost in beef production (Jim 2009). In feedlots of the mid-Western United States, total morbidity ranges from 5-11% of animals received and total mortality ranges from 0.57% to 1.07% of animals received (Smith 1998). Musculoskeletal diseases in the feedlot account for between 6% and 11% of morbidity, with chronic musculoskeletal conditions accounting for 40%–60% of cattle sold for salvage slaughter prior to reaching target weight (Edwards 2002). Proper management of these chronically ill and lame cattle represents a major opportunity for minimizing losses. Nonetheless, feedlot injuries are one of the most overlooked and mis-diagnosed conditions in feedlots (Stokka et al 2001). This paper will use the case of a chronically lame yearling steer in a Western Canadian feedlot as a gateway to discuss causes of bovine lameness in feedlots.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrobial infections and disease research→French-language works237,207→