MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4402540910 · doi:10.1093/jas/skae234.199

479 Pain control for the castration of newborn bull calves by elastration

2024· article· en· W4402540910 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mariah Crevier, Derek B. Haley, Jeffrey Rau, Jessica Gordon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVirus-based gene therapy research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCastrationMedicinePain controlAnimal scienceBiologyInternal medicineAnesthesiaHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract All methods of castration are known to cause pain regardless of the method, or age of the animal. Our objective was to explore providing pain control for bull calves castrated by elastration prior to 1 wk of age. Singleton, bull calves (n = 85) born at the Ontario Beef Research Centre were enrolled and randomly assigned to 1 of 5 treatment groups at birth: a single dose of oral meloxicam at castration (1ORAL), a dose of oral meloxicam at castration and a second oral dose 1 wk later (2ORAL), a dose of injectable meloxicam at castration (1INJECT), not castrated (SHAM), or castrated without pain control (PAINFUL). Calves were treated within 48 h of birth and followed until weaning. All calves were observed 2 h/d for 13 different pain-associated behaviors (e.g., tail flicks, kicking, licking the scrotum) on the day of castration (d 0), as well as d 1, 2, 7, 8, and 9. To record general activity, from d -1 to d 14 each calf wore an Onset HOBO Pendant G Data Logger attached to one of their hind legs. Calves were weighed weekly until they were turned-out to pasture and thereafter weighed bi-weekly until weaning. Five behaviors were statistically significant between treatment groups. PAINFUL calves had roughly three times the rate of licking (P > 0.05) compared with calves in 1ORAL, 2ORAL, and 1INJECT groups, and four times the rate of licking compared with SHAM calves. Additionally, PAINFUL calves had two times the rate of tail flicks (P < 0.05) compared with meloxicam-treated calves, and five times the rate of tail flicks compared with SHAM calves. A treatment effect (P < 0.05) was observed for standing time, with PAINFUL calves spending the least amount of time standing on average in a 24-h period. No statistical time differences were seen between the remaining treatment groups. No treatment or treatment*time interaction effects were observed for lying time. A tendency was seen for treatment effect on lying time (P = 0.0581), with PAINFUL calves spending the most time lying on average and having a significance difference compared with all other treatment groups (LSM > 0.05). No treatment effect was seen for average daily gain up to wk 8, and for final weaning weights. Weight at time of castration was significant (P < 0.05); however, calves were not blocked by BW when assigned to treatment. In conclusion, meloxicam-treated calves expressed decreased rates of pain-associated behaviors compared with PAINFUL calves, and BW did not differ at time of weaning. Our results provide evidence that calves castrated by elastration before 1 wk of age and received meloxicam, experience less pain.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 Science→Same topicVirus-based gene therapy research→French-language works237,207→