Dairy producer perceptions toward male dairy calves in the Midwestern United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Male dairy calves are often sold from the farm of birth within the first few days of life. Research describing the care of male calves is limited, with an emphasis on parsing differences between the care of male and female calves. The aims of this study were to describe dairy producers’ self-reported care practices for male relative to female calves, as well as their perceptions toward male calf care and welfare. Overall, 24 dairy producers in Ohio and Indiana participated in 1 in-person focus group (n = 10) or were individually interviewed (n = 14) using a semi-structured questionnaire with closed and open-ended questions about neonatal calf care and welfare. Discussions were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data from closed-ended questions are described quantitatively, and thematic analysis was used to identify common themes discussed by producers for open-ended questions. A majority of producers described using different care protocols for male and female dairy calves (64%; 9/14 interview participants). Low input care practices were more commonly consistent between male and female calves, such as colostrum protocols (71%; 10/14 interview participants) and navel care (100%; 14/14 interview participants) than more costly treatments. Of the producers that provided disease prevention products to female calves (79%; 11/14 interview participants), only a few also administered them to male calves (27%; 3/11 interview participants). Three major themes were constructed from the open-ended questions, including factors affecting male dairy calf care, attitude toward male calf welfare, and opportunities to improve male dairy calf welfare. Producers described multiple factors that influenced male calf care on the dairy, such as time and money required to care for them. There was divergence in concern among producers about male calf welfare, with some producers expressing concern, particularly for calves slaughtered soon after birth; yet others described feelings of indifference about the topic. Potential ways to improve male calf welfare, including greater sale prices and the involvement in specialized marketing schemes, were suggested by some producers. These findings highlight potential concerns for male calf welfare and ways to improve future care on dairy farms.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".