MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242242118 · doi:10.22175/rmc2017.102

Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry as a Rapid and Non-Destructive Method for Determination of Lean, Fat and Bone Content in Livestock

2017· article· en· W4242242118 on OpenAlex
Ó. López-Campos, M. Juárez, I. L. Larsen, N. Prieto, Jordan C. Roberts, M. Dugan, J.L. Aalhus

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMeat and Muscle Biology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDual-energy X-ray absorptiometryCalibrationDual energyCrossbreedMathematicsAnimal scienceCoefficient of determinationPopulationLean meatLinear regressionBone mineralStatisticsMedicineBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ObjectivesTo implement dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as a platform technology, calibrations and development of robust equations to attain precision and accuracy are required before using for routine predictions of carcass yields in livestock. This manuscript summarized results of ongoing research where DXA has been used to estimate lean, fat, and bone carcass composition in beef, pork and lamb.Materials and MethodsFrom a wide range of carcasses, a total of 334 beef (230 crossbred finished steers and 104 cows), 212 pork and 155 lamb carcasses were used to build calibration equations within each population. Left carcass sides were scanned with a Lunar iDXA unit and then dissected into lean, fat, and bone and weighed. Partial least square regression was used to carry out the prediction equations for lean, fat and bone values from primal cuts scans (independent) and actual lean, fat and bone obtained through the full dissection (dependent). The predictive ability of the models was evaluated in terms of coefficient of determination (R2) and root mean square error of calibration (RMSE).ResultsThe PLSR results between actual and DXA estimated lean and fat values showed high relationship (R2 > 0.97) across all the species. Within beef, the present results suggest that DXA capacity to estimate carcass composition is independent of maturity. With regard to the bone predictions, PLSR analyses also improved the relationship for bone predictions compared to simple regression models previously developed at this institution or single pass scans for pork and lamb. Observed R2 values for predicting bone were slightly lower than those for lean and fat estimations, particularly in those carcasses with smaller bone sizes such as pork (R2 = 0.889) and lamb (R2 = 0.870).ConclusionThe results suggest that DXA technology can reliably estimate carcass composition in livestock, particularly for lean and fat estimations. Using PLSR analyses, suitable models for research have been developed from main primal scan data. However, further studies to externally validate the prediction accuracy and to obtain calibration curves for specific retail cuts or carcass cut-outs specifications are needed. Prediction accuracies for industry applications using single pass scans will also be needed.

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.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.304
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