MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200514665 · doi:10.3390/ani11123485

Association between Udder and Quarter Level Indicators and Milk Somatic Cell Count in Automatic Milking Systems

2021· article· en· W4200514665 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maddalena Zucali, Luciana Bava, A. Tamburini, Giulia Gislon, A. Sandrucci

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimals · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy Cows
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUdderMilkingSomatic cell countAutomatic milkingAnimal scienceHerdQuarter (Canadian coin)MastitisMilk productionLactationMedicineBiologyVeterinary medicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automatic Milking Systems (AMS) record a lot of information, at udder and quarter level, which can be useful for improving the early detection of altered udder health conditions. A total of 752,000 records from 1003 lactating cows milked with two types of AMS in four farms were processed with the aim of identifying new indicators, starting from the variables provided by the AMS, useful to predict the risk of high milk somatic cell count (SCC). Considering the temporal pattern, the quarter vs. udder percentage difference in milk electrical conductivity showed an increase in the fourteen days preceding an official milk control higher than 300,000 SCC/mL. Similarly, deviations over time in quarter vs. udder milk yield, average milk flow, and milking time emerged as potential indicators for high SCC. The Logistic Analysis showed that Milk Production Rate (kg/h) and the within-cow within-milking percentage variations of single quarter vs. udder milk electrical conductivity, milk yield, and average milk flow are all risk factors for high milk SCC. The result suggests that these variables, alone or in combination, and their progression over time could be used to improve the early prediction of risk situations for udder health in AMS milked 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)0.001
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimalsSame topicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy CowsFrench-language works237,207