MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214873625 · doi:10.2458/azu_jrm_v57i3_majak

Clinical signs in cattle grazing high molybdenum forage

2004· article· en· W4214873625 on OpenAlexaffabout
W. Majak, Daniel Steinke, Jason McGillivray

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Range Management · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsKamloops Art Gallery
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrazingForageAnimal scienceDactylis glomerataRevegetationRumenMedicago sativaLamenessBiologyStockingVeterinary medicineAgronomyMedicineSurgeryLand reclamationPoaceaeEcologyFood scienceFermentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Revegetation and sustainable cattle grazing are major objectives in the reclamation of mine tailings at the Highland Valley Copper mine in British Columbia, Canada. A total of 84 cow-calf pairs grazed forage extremely high in molybdenum (Mo) for 11 weeks in the summer and fall for 3 consecutive years (1999-2001). The average stocking rate was 0.63 ha AUM-1. The animals' diet consisted primarily of alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) and orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.) containing 100-400 ppm Mo. Both cows and calves showed adequate daily gains of 0.78 kg head-1 day-1 and 1.33 kg head-1 day-1, respectively. Uptake of Mo was demonstrated by elevated levels of Mo in rumen contents and feces. Clinical signs of Mo toxicity were observed in less than half of the cows and in only a few calves. Clinical signs included a stiff shuffling gait, watery diarrhea, and a rough hair coat. Lameness, the primary sign, was resolved in all animals by the end of each trial. Diarrhea was also resolved by the end of the trial and hair coats returned to normal by the following spring. The onset and severity of the affliction appeared to be related to prevailing moisture conditions, which may have affected Mo availability in forage. Some affected animals were treated with Cu injections to no avail. Liver biopsies and serum samples showed marginal to adequate copper (Cu) levels but potentially toxic levels of Mo. In the third year of the trial, Cu-containing boluses were employed but they did not prevent the onset of clinical signs.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Range ManagementSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207