MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The effects of part-time dam-contact and stepwise weaning and separation on the voluntary human approach behaviour of dairy calves

2023· article· en· W4321368012 on OpenAlex

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

VenueApplied Animal Behaviour Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersInternationalt Center for Forskning i Økologisk Jordbrug og FødevaresystemerMinisteriet for Fø devarer, Landbrug og FiskeriGrønt Udviklings- og Demonstrations ProgramAarhus Universitet
KeywordsAnimal-assisted therapyWeaningAnimal sciencePet therapyHUBzeroTurnoverVeterinary medicineAnimal welfareSeparation (statistics)BiologyMathematicsMedicineStatisticsEcologyManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dairy calves are commonly reared without contact with their dam, which facilitates a human-animal relationship based on close human contact and feeding. Dam-contact may negatively affect calves’ relationship with humans. The current study investigates the effect of dam-contact and weaning method on calves’ response to humans. A total of 69 dairy calves were allocated to one of three dam-contact treatments [Control (separated from dam after 24 h), Whole-day (housed with dam for 23 h/d), and Half-day (housed with dam for 10 h/d)]. Within each treatment, calves were allocated to one of two weaning treatments [Stepwise (weaning off milk at eight weeks, dam-separation/pen change at nine weeks) or Simultaneous (weaning off milk and dam-separation/pen change simultaneously at nine weeks), i.e Control were weaned in the same manner but only the pen change was possible at the separation step, as calves were already separated from the dam]. All animals received a similar amount of human contact, except control calves who were additionally fed milk by teat bucket twice a day. Calves were tested in a random order within block using a human approach test followed by an animal approach test conducted in a 2.5 m x 10 m arena at 10 weeks of age. Stepwise-Control calves had shorter latencies to first approach the test person than Stepwise-Whole-day (p < 0.05, median survival time of Stepwise-Control: 11 s, Stepwise-Whole-day: 111 s and Stepwise-Half-day: 52 s). Among Simultaneous calves, no dam-contact treatment differences were detected for the latency to first approach. Similarly, Stepwise-Control calves had an odds ratio (95% CI) of 24.2 (1.6–365.9, p < 0.05) for coming within 1 m of the test person vs Stepwise-Whole-day calves and 12.5 (1.1–141.1, p < 0.05) vs Stepwise-Half-day calves. Throughout the test period Simultaneous-Control vocalised less [estimated mean no. of vocalisations (95% CI), 3.6 (2.1–6.4)] than both Simultaneous-Whole-day [18.2 (12.8–25.9), p < 0.01] and Simultaneous-Half-day [15.7 (11.0–22.5), p < 0.01] while there was no difference under Stepwise. As expected, Control approached faster and were more likely to come close to the test person than dam-reared calves, but exclusively after the stepwise weaning and separation. For calves tested one week after simultaneous weaning and separation no effect of the dam-contact treatments was found, except a higher frequency of vocalisations for dam-reared calves. This implies that controlling for the stress level related to weaning and separation from the dam is important when interpreting human-animal relationship tests, as dam-contact treatment effects appeared to be affected by high levels of weaning stress.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.619
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.281 · 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