MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4400315104 · doi:10.3168/jds.2024-25034

Predicting subacute ruminal acidosis from milk mid-infrared estimated fatty acids and machine learning on Canadian commercial dairy herds

2024· article· en· W4400315104 on OpenAlexafffundabout
F. Huot, S. Claveau, A. Bunel, D. Warner, D.E. Santschi, R. Gervais, Éric R. Paquet

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsSte. Anne's HospitalUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNovalaitCanadian Dairy Commission
KeywordsDairy cattleHerdMathematicsDairy industryAnimal scienceMachine learningFood scienceChemistryComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our objective was to validate the possibility of detecting SARA from milk Fourier transform mid-infrared spectroscopy estimated fatty acids (FA) and machine learning. Subacute ruminal acidosis is a common condition in modern commercial dairy herds for which diagnosis remains challenging due to its symptoms often being subtle, nonexclusive, and not immediately apparent. This observational study aimed at evaluating the possibility of predicting SARA by developing machine learning models to be applied to farm data and to provide an estimated portrait of SARA prevalence in commercial dairy herds. A first dataset, composed of 488 milk samples from 67 cows (initial DIM = 8.5 ± 6.18; mean ± SD) from 7 commercial dairy farms and their corresponding SARA classification (SARA+ if rumen pH <6.0 for 300 min, otherwise SARA-) was used for the development of machine learning models. Three sets of predictive variables (milk major components [MMC], milk FA [MFA], and MMC combined with MFA [MMCFA]) were submitted to 3 different algorithms, namely elastic net (EN), extreme gradient boosting, and partial least squares, and evaluated using 3 different scenarios of cross-validation. The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the resulting 27 models were analyzed using a linear mixed model. Model performance was not significantly affected by the choice of algorithm. Model performance was improved by including FA estimations (MFA and MMCFA as opposed to MMC alone). Based on these results, 1 model was selected (algorithm: EN; predictive variables: MMCFA; 60.4%, 65.4%, and 55.3% of accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity, respectively) and applied to a large dataset comprising the first test-day record (milk major components and FA within the first 70 DIM of 211,972 Holstein cows [219,503 samples]) collected from 3,001 commercial dairy herds. Based on this analysis, the within-herd SARA prevalence of commercial farms was estimated at 6.6 ± 5.29% ranging from 0% to 38.3%. A subsequent linear mixed model was built to investigate the herd-level factors associated with higher within-herd SARA prevalence. Milking system, proportion of primiparous cows, herd size, and seasons were all herd-level factors affecting SARA prevalence. Furthermore, milk production was positively associated with SARA prevalence, and milk fat yield was negatively associated. Due to their moderate levels of accuracy, the SARA prediction models developed in our study, using data from continuous pH measurements on commercial farms, are not suitable for diagnostic purposes. However, these models can provide valuable information at the herd level.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.267
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy Science→Same topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology→French-language works237,207→