MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391090535 · doi:10.1186/s42523-023-00277-1

Characterization of the hoof bacterial communities in feedlot cattle affected with digital dermatitis, foot rot or both using a surface swab technique

2024· article· en· W4391090535 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nicholas S. T. Wong, Nilusha Malmuthge, Désirée Gellatly, Wiolene Montanari Nordi, Trevor W. Alexander, Rodrigo Ortega Polo, Eugene Janzen, K. S. Schwartzkopf-Genswein, Murray Jelinski

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Microbiome · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryOlds CollegeUniversity of SaskatchewanAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaBeef Cattle Research Council
KeywordsHoofFoot (prosody)Veterinary medicineFoot rotFeedlotBiologyMedicineAnimal scienceEcologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lameness is defined as altered or abnormal gait due to dysfunction of the locomotor system, and is a health issue of feedlot cattle, having major economic, labour, and welfare implications. Digital dermatitis (DD-a lesion of the plantar surface of the foot) and foot rot (FR-affects the interdigital cleft) are common infectious causes of lameness in feedlots. These hoof lesions can occur alone or in combination (DD + FR) in the same hoof. A total of 208 hoof swabs were collected from three commercial feedlots located in southern Alberta. Every lesion sample was matched with a corresponding control skin sample taken from a healthy contralateral foot. Control skin samples were also collected from cattle with no lesion on any feet. Bacterial communities of three types of hoof lesions (DD, DD + FR, FR) and healthy skin were profiled using 16S amplicon sequencing. RESULTS: Alpha diversity analysis revealed a lower bacterial diversity on DD and FR lesions compared to control skin. Beta diversity analysis showed that bacterial communities of DD, FR, and DD + FR lesions were distinct from those of the control skin. While the impact of feedlot was minimal, lesion type contributed to 22% of the variation observed among bacterial communities (PERMANOVA-R = 0.22, P < 0.01). Compared to the corresponding control skin, there were 11, 12, and 3 differentially abundant (DA) bacterial genera in DD, DD + FR, and FR lesions, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The bacterial community description of a DD + FR lesion is a novel finding. Not only did lesions lead to altered bacterial communities when compared to healthy skin, but the composition of those communities also differed depending on the hoof lesion. The 16S amplicon sequencing of surface swabs has significant value as a research tool in separating different hoof lesions and can provide additional insights to the polybacterial etiology of DD and FR in feedlot cattle.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal MicrobiomeSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207