MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384820048 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0288738

Artificial shade as a heat abatement strategy to grazing beef cow-calf pairs in a subtropical climate

2023· article· en· W4384820048 on OpenAlexaff
Gleise M Silva, Jimena Laporta, Federico Podversich, Tessa M Schulmeister, Erick R. S. Santos, José Carlos Batista Dubeux, Ángela Gonella-Diaza, Nicolás DiLorenzo

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEffects of Environmental Stressors on Livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrazingSubtropicsBeef cattleAnimal scienceHumid subtropical climateBiologyTropical climateCow-calfEcologyAgronomyEnvironmental scienceMedicineHerd

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grazing livestock in subtropical and tropical regions are susceptible to prolonged exposition to periods of extreme environmental conditions (i.e., temperature and humidity) that can trigger heat stress (HS). Currently, there is limited information on the effects of HS in the cow-calf sector globally, including in the southern U.S., as well as on mitigation strategies that could be implemented to improve animal well-being and performance. This study evaluated the impact of artificial shade (SHADE vs. NO SHADE) and breed (ANGUS vs. BRANGUS) on performance of pregnant-lactating cows, nursing heifers, and their subsequent offspring. Twenty-four Angus and 24 Brangus black-hided cows [579 ± 8 kg body weight (BW); approximately 85 d of gestation] and their nursing heifers (approximately 174 d of age) were randomly allocated to 12 'Pensacola' bahiagrass pastures (Paspalum notatum Flüggé; 1.3 ha, n = 4 pairs/pasture), with or without access to artificial shade [NO SHADE BRANGUS (NSB), NO SHADE ANGUS (NSA), SHADE BRANGUS (SB), and SHADE ANGUS (SA)] for 56 d that anticipated weaning during the summer season in Florida. Body condition score (BCS) of cows, blood samples, and BW of cow-calf pairs were obtained every 14 d during the 56-d experimental period until weaning. Following weaning (d 56), treatments were ceased, and cows and weaned heifers were managed alike. Weaned heifers were randomly allocated to 4 pens (n = 12/pen) equipped with GrowSafe feed bunks for 14 d to assess stress responses during weaning via plasma haptoglobin. An effect of SHADE × BREED interaction was detected for cow ADG, BW change, final BW, and final BCS, where SB had the greatest ADG, BW change, final BW, and final BCS. On d 14, SA cows had the greatest concentrations of insulin whereas on d 28 NSB had the lowest concentrations, NSA the greatest, and SA and SB being intermediate. On d 56, SA tended to have the greatest plasma insulin concentrations and SB the lowest. Weight gain per area (kg/ha) tended to be 11.4 kg/ha greater in SHADE vs. NO SHADE pastures. Pre-weaning calf ADG tended to be 0.14 kg greater for SHADE vs. NO SHADE calves. Weaning weight and BW at 14-d post-weaning were lesser for NSB vs. NSA, SA, and SB, whereas no differences in postweaning ADG or haptoglobin were observed. Effects of SHADE × BREED × day interaction was detected on plasma concentrations of IGF-1, in which NSA heifers had the lowest concentrations on weaning day. Gestation length was greater for SHADE vs. NO SHADE cows, but with no impacts on subsequent calf birth and weaning weight. In summary, providing artificial shade to pregnant-lactating beef cows increased body weight gain of nursing heifers and Brangus cows, while no impact on Angus dams were observed. The provision of artificial shade during the first trimester of gestation did not alter growth performance of the subsequent offspring at birth and weaning even though gestation length was longer.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicEffects of Environmental Stressors on LivestockFrench-language works237,207