Predicted essential fatty acid intakes for a group of dairy cows also apply at individual animal level
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ruminant requirements for essential fatty acids (EFAs), particularly linoleic acid (LA) and alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), have not been fully determined, although evidence suggests that an adequate supply of polyunsaturated fatty acids (FAs) could improve immunity and reproduction in transition cows. In previous studies, we predicted EFA intake for a group of cows based on animal characteristics and milk EFA secretions. However, to support precision livestock feeding, we need to match the nutrient requirements and intakes of each cow as closely as possible. Our group-level predictions may not be accurate enough to estimate the EFA intake of an individual cow, due to inter-individual variations in EFA digestion and metabolism related to differences in feed intake, intake patterns, and the composition and functioning of the rumen microbiota. To address this issue, here we set out to establish specific equations that predict EFA intake for an individual cow based on the difference (i.e. the residuals) between observed EFA intake and the predicted EFA intake based on our group-level equations. We studied a database of individual dairy cows (26 experiments; 503 datapoints from three research teams) and we predicted the residuals from (1) dietary and animal-related factors (i.e. full predictions) and (2) animal-related factors only (i.e. field predictions), which are considered more field-amenable. The variance of predicted LA and log ALA intake was explained to 68% by observed LA intake and 66% by observed log ALA intake, respectively. The residuals of LA intake were predicted by dietary ALA content, total FA intake, BW, milk yield and fat content in full predictions, and by BW, feeding level, milk yield and fat content, and sum of milk C4:0 to C14:0 FA in field predictions. The log residuals of ALA intake were predicted by dietary NDF and total FA contents, NDF intake, BW, milk protein, LA and ALA contents, and fat yield in full predictions, and by BW, DM intake, milk LA and ALA contents, and fat yield in field predictions. The field predictions showed a moderate loss of accuracy compared to full predictions based on RMSE of prediction (from 38 to 54 g/d for LA and from 0.090 to 0.12 log (g/d) for ALA). This work is the first to predict the EFA intake of an individual cow based on previously established group-level predictions of EFA intake adjusted for dietary and animal-related factors.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".