Minor stall modifications and outdoor access can help improve dairy cow welfare in tie-stalls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tie-stalls are the most confining method of housing for dairy cows and remain commonly used to house cows in many countries. Finding methods to improve animal welfare through housing modifications and alternative management strategies are of increasing importance. Twelve tie-stall dairy farms in Ontario and Quebec, Canada were visited four times in a 12 month period. Visits were spread to observe the effects of pasture (visit 1), short-term effects of stall modifications (visit 2), effects of winter confinement (visit 3), and final measures after 1 year (visit 4). Lameness, injuries, cow cleanliness, lying and rising behaviors, and production parameters were assessed at each visit. Outdoor access had the largest effect: cows with access to pasture had a lower prevalence of various outcome measures throughout all four visits. Also, cows in modified stalls had a higher prevalence of dirty udders compared to cows in unmodified stalls, but only on farms that provided outdoor access. Although applying minor stall modifications to tie-stalls can help improve aspects of animal welfare, providing year-round outdoor access may represent a more effective method; the continued provision of time outside the stall helps maintain the positive impact of outdoor/pasture access on the welfare of tie-stall dairy cows.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".