MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402533316 · doi:10.1093/jas/skae234.666

PSVIII-14 The significance of colostrum quality on feed efficiency in Canadian Holstein calves

2024· article· en· W4402533316 on OpenAlexaffabout
Avalon G R Phillips, Ricarda E Jahnel, Colin Lynch, Bayode O. Makanjuola, F. Miglior, Flávio S. Schenkel, Christine F. Baes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal health and immunology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColostrumAnimal scienceBiologyQuality (philosophy)Immunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract For a more sustainable dairy industry it is crucial to select for feed-efficient cattle. Although feed efficiency research has primarily focused on lactating animals, genetic selection for feed efficiency in calves has continued to gain research interest. Previously estimated genetic parameters for pre-weaned calf feed efficiency suggest residual metabolizable energy intake (RMEI) as a potential trait for selection. However, the trait definition of RMEI needs further evaluation. In previous studies only the intake of colostrum, fed in the first hours of the lif of a calf, was included to define RMEI. The inclusion of colostrum quality ([grams of immunoglobulin (g IgG)] might better represent the transfer of passive immunity to calves and enhance the indicator trait for feed efficiency. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of colostrum characteristics on estimating RMEI as a measure of calf feed efficiency in Canadian Holstein calves. Records from 330 pre-weaned Canadian Holstein calves between 0 and 65 d of age, born between 2016 and 2021 were provided by The Ontario Dairy Research Centre (Elora, ON, Canada). Data included calf health (incidence of scours, 1 = event, 2 = no event), feed intake (kg), body weight (BW; kg), and colostrum quality (g IgG) ranging between 17.41 and 151.69 g IgG. RMEI was estimated by four linear regression models using metabolizable energy intake (MEI) for two time periods (RMEI1 = first month of age calves, RMEI2 = second month of age calves) according to previous studies. For both time periods, colostrum quality was then included in the linear regression model, in addition to scours incidence, year and season, trial, and regression on average daily gain and metabolic BW to estimate RMEI corrected for colostrum quality (i.e., RMEIc1 and RMEIc2). Colostrum quality was fitted as a fixed effect with four classes (≤72 g IgG, 73-76 g IgG, 77-96 g IgG, ≥97 g IgG), divided according to the quartiles of its distribution. The inclusion of colostrum quality had a significant effect on MEI in the first month of age (P ± 0.001) and a trend for significance in the second month of age (P = 0.095). RMEIc model had an adjusted R2 value of 0.86 with the inclusion of colostrum quality in the first time-period. As a next step, genetic parameters need to be estimated to determine any possible gain using RMEIc over RMEI. Improving the definition of RMEI will further the potential to select for feed efficiency in younger animals to achieve sustainability goals.

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)0.001
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 score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal health and immunologyFrench-language works237,207